HOUSE...  No.  415. 


REPORTS 


ON  THE  SUBJECT  OF  A 


LICENSE   LAW-, 


BY  A 


JOINT  SPECIAL  COMMITTEE 


OF  THE 


0f 


TOGETHER  WITH  A 

STENOGRAPHIC  REPORT  OF  THE 

TESTIMONY 

TAKEN"  BEFORE  SAID  COMMITTEE. 

LI  15  K  A  i;  V 

I    N  M-  —  —  '" 


*  -A  LI  KOI;. si  \. ) 

. 


BOSTON: 

WRIGHT    &    POTTER,    STATE     PRINTERS, 
No.  4   SPRING   LANE. 

1867. 


CONTENTS. 


Tape. 

Report  of  Committee, ' .  5—22 

Number  of  Male  Petitioners  and  Remonstrants,  by  Counties,  ....  23 
Bill  to  regulate  the  Sale  of  Spirituous  and  Intoxicating  Liquors,  (reported  by 

the  Committee,)  .  . .  24—32 

Minority  Report, 33 — 52 

Bill  to  amend  Section  Ninth  of  Chapter  Eighty-Six  of  the  General  Statutes, 

(reported  by  the  Minority,) 53 

Dissenting  Report,  by  Mr.  Fay, 54 — 63 

Bill  to  authorize  Druggists  and  Apothecaries  to  sell  Spirituous  Liquors, 

(reported  by  Mr.  Fay,) • 64 

Bill  concerning  the  State  Liquor  Commissioner  aisd  State  Assayer,  (reported 

by  Mr.  Fay,) 66 

Dissenting  Report,  by  Mr.  Sherman, 68 

APPENDIX. 

Testimony  for  Petitioners, 2 — 417 

"  for  Remonstrants, 418—868 

"  in  behalf  of  CoUege  of  Pharmacy, .  869—894 

List  of  Witnesses, 895—808 


€ommont»ealtl)  of 


HOUSE  OP  REPRESENTATIVES,  May  14, 1867. 

The  Joint  Special  Committee,  to  whom  were  referred  the  various 
Petitions  of  34,963  legal  voters,  praying  for  the  enactment  of 
a  law  for  the  regulation  of  the  sale  of  spirituous  and  intoxi- 
cating liquors,  and  the  Petition  of  the  Massachusetts  College 
of  Pharmacy,  asking  for  such  alterations  in  the  present  law 
that  druggists  and  apothecaries  may  be  permitted  to  sell 
liquors  for  medicinal  and  certain  other  purposes;  together 
with  the  various  Remonstrances  of  25,863  legal  voters,  the 
officers  of  many  temperance  organizations  and  conventions, 
and  of  14,471  women  and  others,  severally  against  the  pas- 
sage of  a  license  law,  submit  the  following 

REPORT: 

In  view  of  the  importance  of  the  subject  and  the  general 
interest  manifested  in  it  by  the  very  large  numbers  of  petitioners 
and.  remonstrants,  the  Committee  determined  to  give  a  series  of 
public  hearings,  at  which  testimony  and  arguments  might  be 
presented.  These  began  on  the  19th  of  February  and  ended  on 
the  3d  of  April,  there  being  twenty-seven  in  all.  One  hearing 
was  given  to  the  College  of  Pharmacy ;  the  remainder  were 
equally  divided  between  the  petitioners  and  remonstrants. 
Under  an  Order  of  the  legislature  both  parties  were  entitled  to 
use  the  process  of  the  Commonwealth  in  summoning  any  wit- 
nesses whom  they  desired  from  any  part  of  the  State,  and  their 
testimony  is  transmitted  herewith  as  an  Appendix  to  this  Report. 
In  addition  to  this  large  mass  of  evidence,  able,  learned  and 
eloquent  arguments  were  addressed  to  the  Committee  by  the 


6  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

distinguished  gentlemen  who  represented  the  several  parties. 
The  theory  and  workings  of  the  present  law  and  the  expediency 
of  any  modification  in  the  same  w^ere  all  investigated  and  dis- 
cussed with  great  thoroughness  and  care.  Indeed  it  would 
hardly  seem  that  any  new  light  could  be  thrown  upon  the 
subject,  upon  either  side. 

It  is  not  necessary,  nor  would  it  be  practicable,  for  the  Com- 
mittee  to  review  the  testimony  or  arguments  in  detail.  It  will 
be  sufficient  that  they  state  briefly  the  conclusions  to  which  they 
have  come. 

The  prayer  of  the  petitioners  is  for  certain  modifications  of 
the  statutes  relating  to  the  sale  of  spirituous  and  intoxicating 
liquors. 

These  statutes  have  constituted  a  prominent  feature  in  the 
criminal  legislation  of  the  State  for  many  years.  Enacted 
originally  with  the  sincere  belief  on  the  part  of  many  good  men 
that  they  were  right  in  principle  and  would  prove  successful  in 
operation,  they  were  designed,  undoubtedly,  like  other  criminal 
statutes,  to  promote  the  good  order,  peace  and  security  of  the 
community.  They  prohibit  absolutely  the  sale  of  all  spirituous 
and  intoxicating  liquors,  including  therein  wine,  ale,  porter, 
lager  beer  and  cider,  to  be  used  as  a  beverage,  (recognizing, 
however,  the  right  of  importers  to  sell  imported  liquors  in  the 
original  packages.)  They  prohibit,  also,  the  sale  of  liquors  for 
any  other  purpose,  whether  medicinal  or  mechanical,  except  the 
same  are  obtained  from  the  State  Agency  and  sold  by  the  State 
Agent,  his  sub-agents,  or  the  agents  appointed  by  the  different 
towns.  The  petitioners  .ask  that  this  law  may  be  so  modified,  as 
that  the  State  Agency  may  cease  to  have  the  monopoly  of  the 
sale  of  liquors  for  medicinal  and  mechanical  purposes,  though 
allowing  it  .still  to  furnish  the  town  agents  ;  that  druggists  and 
apothecaries  may  be  permitted,  under  proper  restrictions,  to  sell 
for  medicinal  purposes,  and  that  the  other  provisions  of  the  law 
may  be  so  far  changed  that,  under  proper  restrictions,  in  such 
cities  and  towns  as  shall  desire  it,  hotel-keepers,  common  victual- 
lers and  certain  other  parties,  may  be  permitted  to  sell. 

Before  considering  the  main  issues  involved  in  this  inquiry, 
there  are  three  facts  which  meet  us  at  the  threshold. 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  7 

The  first  fact  is  the  strength  and  character  of  the  opposition 
to  the  present  law.  We  do  not  propose  here  to  balance  the 
numbers  of  petitioners  and  remonstrants  against  each  other,  nor 
to  attempt  a  comparison  of  their  respective  claims  upon  us  by 
reason  of  their  peculiar  abilities,  social  position  or  experience. 
So  invidious  a  task  is  immaterial  to  the  point  before  us.  Dis- 
avowing, therefore,  any  attempt  to  institute  comparisons,  or  to 
overlook  the  numbers  and  character  of  the  remonstrants,  we 
say  that  it  is  a  surprising  fact,  that  if  the  existing  statutes  be 
sound  in  principle  and  fruitful  of  good  results  in  practice,  such 
a  very  large  proportion  of  all  the  legal  voters  of  the  State 
should  petition  for  a  change. 

Again,  among  the  witnesses  for  the  petitioners  there  were  very 
many  men,  whose  characters  and  opportunities  for  information 
gave  peculiar  weight  to  their  testimony.  Several  of  the  former 
governors  of  the  State,  a  large  majority  of  the  municipal  offi- 
cers of  our  cities,  present  and  former  judges,  present  and  for- 
mer district-attorneys,  eminent  and  revered  ministers  of  the 
gospel  of  every  denomination,  city  missionaries,  a  large  body  of 
our  most  distinguished  medical  men  and  chemists,  sound  and 
experienced  business  men,  many  total  abstinence  men — some 
of  whom  had  advocated  and  been  foremost  in  the  enactment  of 
the  present  law, — with  very  many  others,  coming  from  all  parts 
of  the  State  and  looking  at  the  questions  at  issue  from  their 
various  points  of  view,  testified  in  favor  of  a  modification  of  the 
law.  It  is  without  precedent  in  the  history  of  the  legislation 
.of  this  State,  that  a  criminal  statute  should  be  so  numerously 
opposed  by  men  of  this  class  and  character. 

The  second  fact  is,  that  this  opposition  is  increasing,  instead 
of  decreasing,  and  is  more  general,  rather  than  less  general, 
than  it  was  a  few  years  ago.  Very  frequently  there  is  a 
decided  contest  over  the  establishment  of  a  new  principle  in 
legislation  ;  but  in  ordinary  cases,  if  it  is  found  to  work  toler- 
ably well,  the  old  opposition  gradually  dies  out  and  disappears. 
It  is  certainly  a  significant  fact  that  the  opposition  to  this  law 
seems  steadily  to  have  increased.  So  long  as  the  law  was  not 
enforced,  there  was  comparatively'  little  opposition  to  it.  As 
soon  as  it  is  enforced,  and  the  further  that  its  principles  are 
carried  into  execution,  there  spring  up  opponents  on  every  side, 


8  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

not  merely  or  chiefly  those  who  are  pecuniarily  interested  in 
the  matter,  but  thousands  of  good  citizens,  who  cannot  be 
assumed  to  be  controlled  by  any  other  motive  than  regard  for 
the  public  good.  If  time  has  proved  the  wisdom  and  justice  of 
the  law,  why  is  it  that  this  opposition  has  increased,  both  in 
number  and  character,  and  that  many  of  the  former  friends  of 
the  law  proclaim  their  change  o£  views  ? 

The  third  fact  is  furnished  by  the  supporters  of  the  laiu  them- 
selves, in  the  character  of  the  legislation,  designed  by  them  from 
time  to  time  to  carry  it  out  more  efficiently. 

In  our  republican  form  of  government,  we  have  always 
recognized  the  fact  that  no  criminal  laws  can  be  faithfully 
executed,  (and  therefore  should  not  be  enacted,)  which  are  not 
sustained  by  the  moral  convictions  of  the  people.  When  we 
make  changes  in  them  from  time  to  time,  we  are  content  to 
leave  the  execution  of  the  new  laws  with  the  ordinary  instru- 
mentalities. For  the  administration  of  our  entire  criminal 
code,  old  laws  and  new  laws,  we  have  relied  upon  the  vigilance 
of  ordinary  municipal  officers  to  complain  of  violations ;  the 
fidelity  of  prosecuting  officers,  elected  by  the  people,  to  take 
charge  of  the  complaints  or  indictments,  when  made  or  found ; 
the  honor  and  good  sense  of  juries,  selected  under  long  estab- 
lished and  well  known  rules,  to  convict  or  acquit,  according  to 
the  law  and  the  evidence, — and  the  discretion  of  the  judges,  in 
case  of  conviction,  to  impose  reasonable  sentences.  All  these 
regular  and  ordinary  methods  were  open  for  the  execution  of 
the  statutes  upon  the  sale  of  liquor.  If  the  moral  judgment  of  • 
the  people  approved  the  law,  there  was  no  sufficient  reason  in 
the  nature  of  things  why  police  officers,  district-attorneys,  juries 
and  judges  should  not  be  as  prompt  and  decided  in  doing  their 
respective  duties  by  this  as  well  as  other  laws.  Yet  the  course 
of  the  supporters  of  the  present  statutes  seems  to  indicate 
great  distrust  upon  their  part,  of  all  these  parties,  or  rather 
that  there  is  something  in  the  law  so  different  from  the  princi- 
ples of  our  ordinary  criminal  legislation  and  so  repugnant  to 
the  popular  instincts,  that  new  and  arbitrary  methods  are 
necessary  to  enforce  it. 

Every  city  and  large  town  has  its  local  police,  which  had 
been  found  effective  enough  in  preserving  the  peace,  and  pros- 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  9 

ecating  violations  of  State  and  municipal  laws.  It  is  a  force 
created  by  the  municipalities,  most  interested  in  preserving 
order  within  their  own  limits.  Yet  the  execution  of  this  law 
could  not,  it  was  thought,  be  safely  intrusted  to  them,  because 
they  were  not  sufficiently  eager  to  prosecute  ;  and  hence  a  sys- 
tem of  State  constabulary  was  adopted,  until  that  time  unknown 
in  this  country  and  in  other  republics,  and  borrowed  from 
monarchical  countries. 

So  too  in  the  disposal  of  other  cases,  after  they  have  come 
before  the  criminal  court,  district-attorneys  have  been  allowed 
to  exercise  their  discretion,  inasmuch  as  it  was  thought  that 
these  honorable  officers  would  prosecute  all  offences  and  offend- 
ers impartially,  and  would  not  suspend  or  nol.  pros,  any  prose- 
cution unless  paramount  considerations  in  the  case  of  particu- 
lar offences  or  offenders  required  it.  But  the  fifty-eighth  sec- 
tion of  the  eighty-sixth  chapter  of  the  General  Statutes  requires 
these  officers  to  give  precedence  in  the  disposal  of  their  busi- 
ness to  the  cases  arising  under  that  chapter,  (the  prohibitory 
law,)  over  all  other  criminal  cases,  except  those  in  which  par- 
ties are  actually  imprisoned  awaiting  trial ;  that  they  shall  not 
enter  nolle  prosequi,  or  grant  continuance  in  the  case  of  any 
indictment  for  violation  of  that  chapter,  except  upon  written 
motion,  filed  by  defendant,  or  written  certificate  by  the 
prosecuting  officer ;  and  then  that  nol.  pros,  shall  not  be 
entered  except  with  the  concurrence  of  the  court.  But  even 
this  extraordinary  provision  was  not  thought  sufficient ;  for  by 
chapter  223  of  the  Acts  1865,  it  was  further  provided  that  no 
case  under  chapters  eighty-six  or  eighty-seven  of  the  General 
Statutes  should  be  laid  on  file  or  disposed  of,  except  by  trial, 
judgment,  acquittal  or  sentence,  unless  there  was,  first,  a  writ- 
ten motion  setting  forth  the  specific  reasons  for  such  disposal ; 
second,  an  affidavit  verifying  the  facts  ;  and  third,  a  certificate 
of  the  presiding  judge  that  he  is  satisfied  that  the  cause  exists, 
and  that  public  justice  requires  such  disposal,  and  that  the 
court  shall  examine  the  dockets  frequently  to  see  that  the  above 
provisions  are  faithfully  complied  with.  These  strict  enact- 
ments were  designed  to  compel,  and  have  compelled  prosecut- 
ing officers  to  administer  the  law  with  a  harshness  not  deemed 
necessary  in  the  case  of  other  laws. 

2 


10  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

Again,  it  was  believed  that  juries  in  various  parts  of  the 
Commonwealth,  selected  and  empanelled  in  the  ancient  way, 
under  a  system  entirely  satisfactory  until  the  enactment  of  the 
present  law,  would  not  sometimes  convict  in  liquor  cases,  upon 
proper  evidence,  through  the  opposition  to  the  law  on  the  part 
of  some  of  their  number.  Accordingly,  during  many  sessions 
of  the  legislature  attempts  have  been  made,  in  several  instances 
well  nigh  successful,  for  the  avowed  purpose  of  procuring  more 
convictions  in  liquor  cases,  to  change  the  system  of  trial  by 
jury,  either  by  excluding  liquor-dealers  from  the  panel,  or  all 
whose  opinions  would  prevent  them  from  convicting,  or  by 
giving  to  the  prosecuting  officer  the  right  to  challenge  two 
peremptorily. 

Finally,  the  judges  are  not  allowed  to  exercise  the  same 
discretion  as  to  the  punishment  of  these  cases,  as  they  are 
allowed  in  almost  all  other  criminal  cases,  but  must  impose 
the  same  penalty  upon  all  offenders,  disregarding  the  circum- 
stances peculiar  to  each  case,  which  ordinarily  influence, 
and  which  the  law  has  generally  said  should  influence,  the 
judicial  mind. 

We  have  then  a  State  police,  whose  chief  duty  it  is  to  com- 
plain of  violations  of  this  law ;  district-attorneys  and  judges 
placed  under  unusual  and  arbitrary  restrictions  in  the  trial 
and  disposal  of  cases  under  it ;  and  an  almost  successful 
attempt  to  change  the  system  of  jury  trial. 

We  have  not  intended  in  this  enumeration  to  discuss  the 
expediency  of  these  various  enactments.  That  question  is 
foreign  to  this  inquiry.  We  have  referred  to  them,  simply. as 
indicating  the  judgment  of  the  most  prominent  and  earnest 
supporters  of  the  present  prohibitory  law,  that  its  execution 
cannot  safely  be  intrusted  to  the  ordinary  officers  and  methods, 
sustained  by  the  moral  convictions  of  the  people;  and,  again, 
as  indicating  that  the  reason  why  its  execution  cannot  be  safely 
intrusted  to  them,  is  because  in  principle  it  differed  so  widely 
from  other  criminal  legislation.  Surely  if  the  people  thoroughly 
approved  the  law  there  would  seem  to  be  no  occasion  for  these 
departures  from  our  long  established  system  in  the  administra- 
tion of  criminal  statutes. 

The  three  facts  to  which  we  have  alluded,  viz.,  the  strength 
and  character  of  the  opposition  to  the  present  law,  the  steady 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  11 

increase  of  that  opposition,  and  the  extraordinary  methods 
necessary,  in  the  opinion  of  the  friends  of  the  law,  for  enforcing 
it,  tend  to  raise  serious  doubts  as  to  whether  the  law  is  ap- 
proved by  the  people ;  and  if  not  approved  by  the  people, 
whether  it  is  a  just  and  proper  criminal  law. 


We  pass,  however,  from  these  preliminary  considerations 
which,  though  they  may  properly  influence  the  mind  of  legis- 
tors,  having  regard  for  the  good  sense  of  the  people,  should 
not  control  it,  and  come  directly  to  an  examination  for  our- 
selves of  the  theory  and  workings  of  the  law. 

I.  THE  THEORY  OF  THE  LAW. 

We  have  said  that  the  prominent  feature  of  the  law  was  its 
absolute  prohibition  of  the  sale  of  all  intoxicating  liquors, 
including  therein,  wine,  ale,  beer  and  cider,  to  be  used  as 
beverages,  (excepting  the  sale  by  importers  as  above  stated.) 
An  absolute  prohibition  of  the  sale  for  use  as  a  beverage  is,  of 
course,  in  effect  an  absolute  prohibition  of  the  use  as  a 
beverage.  Is  such  absolute  prohibition  of  the  use  right,  wise 
or  expedient  ?  Is  it  fairly  within  the  domain  of  legislative 
action  ?  Is  it  consonant  with  republican  notions  of  the  rights 
of  the  citizens  ?  Is  it  demanded  by  any  imperative  necessity  ? 
Does  it,  in  itself  or  as  a  precedent  for  similar  legislation  upon 
similar  subjects,  accomplish  and  promise  to  accomplish  a  cer- 
tain definite  good,  so  great  as  to  justify  a  resort  to  its  severe 
and  arbitrary  provisions  ? 

Some  of  the  witnesses  before  the  Committee  testified' that  in 
their  opinion  the  drinking  of  any  quantity  of  wine,  cider,  beer 
or  any  intoxicating  liquor,  as  a  beverage,  is  in  all  cases  a  sin. 
If  they  are  right,  then  the  sale  of  liquor,  to  be  used  as  a 
beverage  is,  in  all  cases,  a  sin.  And  if  it  is  a  sin  in  all  cases 
to  sell,  then  such  sales  should  be  absolutely  prohibited,  and 
every  offender  should  be  punished.  But  however  conscientious 
these  witnesses  and  those  who  agree  with  them  may  be  in 
asserting  this,  the  distinguished  representatives  of  the  remon- 
strants distinctly  assured  the  Committee  that  that  was  not  their 
opinion,  nor,  as  they  believed,  that  of  the  mass  of  the  support: 
ers  of  the  present  law.  The  law,  therefore,  does  not,  in  the 


12  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

opinion  of  any  considerable  number  of  its  friends,  rest  upon 
the  proposition  that  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  as  beverages 
is,  in  all  cases  and,  of  itself,  sinful. 

Much  medical  and  chemical  testimony  was  introduced  upon 
both  sides,  in  regard  to  the  dietetic  uses  of  alcohol.  Whether 
alcohol  acts  simply  as  a  stimulant,  or  whether,  in  addition,  it 
acts  as  food  to  the  system,  was  'discussed  at  great  length,  and 
with  much  learning.  So  long  as  scientific  men  differ  widely 
upon  this  subject,  the  Committee  would  not  presume  to  express 
an  opinion  ;  nor  is  it  necessary  for  the  purposes  of  this  inquiry. 
For  whether  the  alcohol  in  wine,  ale,  beer,  cider  and  other 
liquors  acts  simply  as  a  stimulant,  in  the  language  of  Dr.  Car- 
penter, (cited  in  Appendix,  p.  781,)  "  increasing  for  a  time  the 
vital  activity  of  the  body,  but  being  followed  by  a  correspond- 
ing depression  of  power,  which  is  the  more  prolonged  and 
severe  in  proportion  as  the  previous  excitement  has  been 
greater,"  or  whether,  as  stated  by  Dr.  Edward  H.  Clarke, 
(Appendix,  p.  386,)  it  "  may  produce  the  effect  of  food  in  the 
system,  under  certain  circumstances,"  by  arresting  the  disinte- 
gration of  the  tissue,  in  either  case  it  is  very  certain  that  from 
the  earliest  times  to  the  present  day,  in  every  country,  civilized 
and  uncivilized,  men  universally  have  used  alcoholic  beverages 
to  gratify  a  natural  appetite  and  meet  a  real  or  supposed  need 
of  the  system.  And  nature  has  surrounded  us  everywhere  with 
the  materials  from  which  these  beverages  can  be  prepared  by 
the  simplest  processes  of  distillation  or  fermentation.  It  is 
probable  that  scientific  men  will  always  differ  in  their  opinions 
as  to  whether  these  beverages  are  beneficial  or  injurious.  But 
if  this  is  true,  it  can  be  yet  more  certainly  said  that  each  indi- 
vidual will  always  claim  that  he  is  the  best  judge,  and  is  enti- 
tled to  decide  as  to  his  particular  need  of  them,  and  as  to  their 
effects  upon  himself.  Some  men  may  decide  wrongly,  some 
men  may  use  alcoholic  liquors  excessively  against  their  own 
better  judgment;  still,  they  and  all  other  men  will,  so  long  as 
it  is  conceded  that  the  use  is  not  in  all  cases  sinful,  assert  the 
right  to  decide  whether  and  to  what  extent  they  shall  make  it 
for  themselves. 

Now  the  prohibitory  law  does  not  in  its  terms  directly  under- 
take to  forbid  the  citizen  from  exercising  this  right.  It  is  no 
offence  to  buy  liquors  for  use  as  a  beverage.  It  is  no  offence 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  13 

to  use  them  as  a  beverage.  No  penalty  is  imposed- upon  either. 
Yet  the  prohibition  of  the  sale  is  made,  only  because  the  pur- 
chase and  the  use,  as  a  beverage,  it  is  thought,  should  be  pro- 
hibited. Suppose  now  that  the  law  should  in  direct  terms  also 
prohibit  the  buying  and  the  use,  under  the  same  penalties  as 
the  sale.  Would  there  be  any  question  that  this  would  be  gen- 
erally deemed  an  unjustifiable  influence  with  the  private  rights 
and  habits  of  the  citizen  ?  Could  it  be  distinguished  in  princi- 
ple from  any.  sumptuary  law  ?  and  have  not  republican  govern- 
ments wisely  discarded  such  laws  as  relics  of  tyranny  ?  Every 
man  would  repudiate  the  legislation  which  would  fine  and 
imprison  him  for  every  case  in  which  he  used  alcoholic  liquors 
as  a  beverage.  Indeed,  our  legislative  records  show  that  bills 
to  punish  the  buyer  of  intoxicating  liquor,  equally  with  the 
seller,  have  repeatedly  been  rejected  by  almost  unanimous 
votes.  There  are  no  reliable  statistics  to  show  what  proportion 
of  our  population  wholly  abstain  from  the  use  of  wine,  ale, 
beer,  cider  and  other  liquors,  as  beverages.  It  is  probably 
very  small.  There  are  probably  no  large  communities  in  which 
a  majority  never  drink  any  quantity  of  any  of  the  prohibited 
liquors  for  other  than  medicinal  purposes.  In  point  of  fact,  a 
provision  prohibiting  the  use  as  a  beverage,  under  the  penalties 
now  imposed  upon  the  seller,  if  enforced,  would  fine  and 
imprison,  at  some  time  or  other,  almost  all  the  male  population 
of  the  State. 

Now  the  essential  defect  in  the  theory  of  the  present  law  is, 
that  it  attempts  by  indirect  methods  to  enforce  the  very  prin- 
ciple of  prohibition  of  the  use  as  a  beverage,  which,  in  direct 
terms,  is  not  and  never  would  be  incorporated  into  the  law, 
and  that  that  general  and  absolute  prohibition  of  the  use  does 
not  rest,  as  has  been  said,  on  the  proposition  which,  if  true, 
would  logically  support  it,  viz.,  that  the  use  is  in  itself  a  sin. 
This  defect  is  understood  by  the  people.  If  the  police  officer, 
the  district-attorney,  the  juror  or  the  judge  buys  liquors  for  use 
as  a  beverage,  and  so  uses  them,  conscious  that  he  violates  no 
law,  divine  or  human,  it  is  not  surprising  that  he  recoils  at  the 
idea  of  complaining  against,  prosecuting,  convicting  and  sen- 
tencing to  fine  and  imprisonment  the  man  whose  only  offence 
may  have  been  to  sell  these  liquors.  No  sophistry  can  prevent 
people  from  taking  this  view  of  the  law.  The  law  is  unsound 


14  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

in  the  assumptions  on  which  it  rests,  and  wrong  in  its  punish- 
ment of  the  seller,  instead  of  the  buyer  and  the  user.  If  it  is 
wrong  to  use  liquors  as  beverages,  why  not  punish  those  who 
use  them  ?  If  the  law  studiously  neglects  to  punish  the  buyer 
and  the  user,  is  it  not  strong  proof  that,  in  the  opinion  of  those 
who  framed  it,  the  use  is  not  wrong  ?  And  if  the  use  is  not 
wrong,  is  there  any  sense  or  justice  in  punishing  those  who  sell 
for  the  use  ? 

But  many  say,  that  while  every  man  has  the  absolute  right 
to  eat  and  drink  as  he  pleases,  still,  that  living  in  commu- 
nities as  men  do,  he  holds  his  absolute  rights  in  subjection  to 
the  general  good  of  the  community ;  that  the  general  good  of 
the  community  requires  that  all  men  should  abstain  from  the 
use  of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  beverage,  not  because  it  is  sin- 
ful in  itself,  nor  because  it  will  injure  all  men,  but  because 
some  men  will  use  them  improperly  and  excessively.  Even  if 
this  proposition  were  correct,  the  defect  in  the  law,  to  which 
we  have  alluded, — the  punishment  of  the  seller,  instead  of  the 
buyer, — would  not  be  cured,  for  that  objection  applies  as 
strongly  to  this  statement  of  the  basis  of  the  law,  as  to  the  first 
proposition,  that  the  use  is  generally  sinful  or  injurious.  But 
passing  by  this  serious  defect  in  the  method  by  which  total 
abstinence  is  to  be  enforced,  we  say  that  it  is  beyond  the  legiti- 
mate scope  of  legislative  action  to  attempt,  by  criminal  enact- 
ments, to  prevent  the  many  from  using  these  beverages  because 
a  few  may  abuse  them.  We  are  reminded  that  Paul  said,  "  It 
is  good  neither  to  eat  flesh,  nor  to  drink  wine,  nor  anything 
whereby  thy  brother  stumbleth,  or  is  offended,  or  is  made 
weak  ;  "  but  it  seems  to  us  a  strange  perversion  of  the  apostle's 
meaning,  to  say  that  the  sublime  rule  of  self-denial  and  self- 
sacrifice  in  all  things  which  he  enjoined  as  a  moral  precept,  to 
operate  upon  the  heart  of  the  Christian,  and  guide  his  individ- 
ual course  in  his  conduct  towards  his  fellow-men,  with  its  dif- 
ferent practical  applications,  according  as  circumstances  might 
differ,  should  be  enacted  into  an  arbitrary  criminal  Act,  and 
enforced  by  severe  pains  and  penalties. 

That  the  excessive  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  produces 
deplorable  results,  and  that  men  should  be  most  urgently  coun- 
selled to  abstain  from  such  excessive  use,  and  should  be  pun- 
ished by  law  if  they  disturb  the  peace  of  the  community  by 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  15 

reason  of  their  excessive  use,  we  are  all  agreed.  That  men 
inclined  to  be  intemperate  may  be  strongly  and  beneficially 
influenced  by  the  example  of  total  abstinence  in  others,  when 
they  see  that  total  abstinence  is  enforced  by  the  individual  upon 
himself  as  an  act  of  self-denial,  for  its  benefit  as  an  example, 
and  does  not  result  from  a  mere  lack  of  desire  to  drink,  or 
from  an  act  of  legislation  compelling  it,  cannot  be  doubted. 
But  it  is  riot  the  province  of  law  to  undertake  to  satisfy  the 
heart  and  min/1  of  the  citizen  that  he  should  practise  temper- 
ance or  total  abstinence,  and  the  law  which  undertakes  to  com- 
pel total  abstinence  on  all  will  simply  curtail  the  rights  and 
liberties  of  the  many,  who  may  use  liquors  without  injury, 
while  it  will  fail  to  produce  the  moral  change  in  the  few  who 
cannot  use  them  without  injury,  sufficient  to  induce  them  to 
abstain.  For  unless  that  moral  change  is  produced  they  will 
not  cease  to  make  the  excessive  use,  and  so  long  as  the  pro- 
hibitory law  itself  provides  by  its  State  Agency  for  the  keeping 
of  vast  quantities  of  liquors,  men  with  strong  appetites  will  not 
fail  to  get  them  in  some  way. 

We  sum  up  in  three  propositions  our  statement  of  the  defects 
in  the  theory  of  the  prohibitory  law  : — 

1.  It  is  not  sinful  nor  hurtful  in  every  case  to  use  every  kind 
of  alcoholic  liquors  as  beverages.     It  is  not,  therefore,  wrong 
in  every  case  to  sell  every  kind  of  alcoholic  liquors  to  be  used 
as  beverages.     But  this  law  prohibits  every  sale  of  every  kind 
of  alcoholic  liquors  to  be  used  as  beverages. 

2.  It  is  the  right  of  every  citizen  to  determine  for  himself 
what  he  will  eat  and  drink.     A  law  prohibiting  him  from  drink- 
ing every  kind  of  alcoholic   liquors,  universally  used   in   all 
countries  and  ages  as  a  beverage,  is  an  arbitrary  and  unreason- 
able interference  with  his  rights,  and  is  not  justified  by  the  con- 
sideration that  some  men  may  abuse  their  rights,  and  may, 
therefore,  need  the  counsel  and  example  of  good  men  to  lead 
them  to  reform.     But  this  law  does,  in  theory,  prohibit  him 
from  drinking  every  kind  of  alcoholic  liquors,  since  it  prohibits 
every  sale  of  every  kind  of  alcoholic   liquors   to  be  used  as 
a  beverage. 

3.  Finally,  if  the  use  should  be  totally  prohibited,  because  it 
is  either  sinful  or  hurtful  in  all  cases,  or  may  be  in  some  cases, 


16  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

the  use  should  be  punished.    But  this  law  punishes  the  sale, 
and  does  not  punish  the  use. 

II.  THE  PRACTICAL  RESULTS  OF  THE  LAW. 

We  have  endeavored  to  show  that  the  law  is  unsound  in 
theory.  We  come,  now,  to  consider  its  practical  workings ; 
how  far  it  has  been  or  can  be  executed  ;  how  far  it  has  checked, 
or  is  likely  to  check,  intemperance  ;  and  what  other  effects, 
good  or  bad,  it  has  produced. 

In  most,  if  not  all,  of  the  counties  of  the  State,  it  is  practi- 
cable to  prosecute  and  convict  open  violators  of  the  law,  though 
with  public  sentiment  in  most  of  the  cities  and  very  many  of 
the  towns  sustaining  those  who  sell,  whether  hotel-keepers, 
grocers  or  apothecaries,  this  is  not  always  possible.  Still,  as 
the  State  constabulary  has  been  almost  doubled  in  numbers, 
and  as  they  are  very  vigilant,  it  is  not  impossible  that  they  will 
succeed  in  prosecuting  successfully  most  of  the  open  places. 

But  the  closing  of  .the  open  places  may  not  only  not  diminish 
the  number  of  sellers,  but  may  actually  increase  them.  The 
evidence  before  the  Committee,  though  of  course  to  some 
extent  conflicting,  tended  to  show  that  in  all  those  cities  or 
towns  where  the  prosecutions  against  open  places  had  been  the 
most  active,  an  extraordinary  number  of  secret  places  was 
started,  and  that  more  liquor  and  worse  liquor  were  drunk,  and 
that  more  intoxication  ensued.  According  to  the  report  of 
Deputy-Chief  of  Police  Savage,  (Appendix,  p.  238,)  the  whole 
number  of  places  in  Boston,  in  which  liquor  was  known  to  be 
sold,  was  1,500  in  1854,  and  1,515  in  1866.  The  number  of 
drunken  persons  taken  up  by  the  police  in  1854  was  6,983, 
while  in  1866  it  was  15,542,  the  largest  number  taken  up 
during  any  year  in  the  history  of  the  city,  except  1861  and 
1863,  two  of  the  years  of  the  war,  when  the  numbers  were 
17,324  and  17,967,  respectively.  The  number  of  drunkards  in 
1866  exceeds  that  of  1865  by  1,657.  Again,  the  State  con- 
stabulary during  the  months  of  January  and  February,  1867, 
made  more  efficient  prosecution  of  violations  of  the  law  than 
had  ever  been  made  in  the  city,  yet  the  number  of  drunken 
persons  taken  up  in  January  was  1,462,  and  in  February, 
1,570,  against  1,118  in  January,  1853,  and  1,059  in  February, 
1863,  the  war  year  referred  to,  when  the  largest  number  of 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  17 

drunken  persons  was  taken  up.  If  the  number  of  cases  for 
1867  is  calculated  upon  the  basis  of  the  returns  for  January 
and  February,  it  will  amount  to  18,192. 

Rev.  James  A.  Healey,  pastor  of  a  very  large  Catholic 
church,  and  visiting  extensively  among  the  poorer  classes, 
says,  (p.  191,)  "  that  in  almost  every  house  they  have  liquor 
and  they  sell  to  those  in  the  house."  Mayor  Norcross  says 
that  "  drunkenness  increases."  Ex-Mayor  Lincoln  says  "  that 
the  sale  of  ardent  spirits  and  the  number  of  drunkards  have 
increased  faster  than  our  population  has  increased."  And 
without  attempting  to  give  the  names  even  of  the  numerous 
witnesses  who  testified  in  regard  to  the  present  condition  of 
things  in  Boston,  it  can  be  safely  asserted  that  while  the  num- 
ber of  open  places  has  undoubtedly  somewhat  diminished,  all  of 
the  principal  hotels,  grocers,  restaurants,  apothecaries  and 
wholesale  liquor-dealers  sell  openly,  an  immense  and  constantly 
increasing  number  of  secret  places  and  "  clubs "  has  been 
established,  drunkenness  has  increased  almost  in  a  direct  ratio 
with  the  'closing  of  public  places,  and  there  is  now  more  of  it 
than  at  any  previous  time  in  the  history  of  the  city. 

In  Cambridge,  Prof.  Bowen  says,  (p.  314,)  "  it  is  as  easy  to 
buy  liquor  now  as  it  is  to  buy  bread,  and  it  can  be  had,  even 
at  a  greater  number  of  places." 

In  Lowell,  the  Hon.  E.  B.  Patch  says,  (p.  244,)  "  I  think  the 
sale  of  liquor  was  never  more  free  than  it  is  at  the  present 
time.  I  believe  that  every  dealer  sells  it  in  the  most  open  man- 
ner, as  much  they  please,  and  to  whom  they  please." 

In  Charlestown,  Judge  Warren,  formerly  mayor,  says,  (p. 
185,)  "  1  should  say  that  intemperance  did  not  diminish."  "  I 
understood  the  present  United  States  collector  to  say  that  two 
hundred  licenses  had  been  granted  in  Charlestown  the  present 
year." 

In  New  Bedford,  City  Marshal  Brownell  says,  (p.  336,)  the 
law  "  has  closed  up  the  places  of  public  sale."  "  I  think  that 
intemperance  or  drunkenness  is  just  about  the  same." 

In  Fall  River,  Ex-Mayor  Buffington  says,  (p.  339,)  "  most 
of  the  public  places  of  the  better  class  that  did  sell,  have  been 
forced,  some  of  them,  to  close,  and  in  the  winter,  when  the 
largest  amount  of  seizures  was  made,  the  arrests  for  drunken- 
ness were  the  largest  of  any  in  the  year." 

3 


18  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

In  Worcester,  Ex-Mayor  Lincoln  says,  (p.  350,)  the  law 
"  has  not  substantially  suppressed  the  sale  of  liquor  nor 
diminished  the  cases  of  drunkenness." 

In  Lynn,  Mayor  Usher  says,  (p.  666,)  "  I  do  not  think  there 
is  an  open  bar  in  the  city."  "  There  are  said  to  be  secret  clubs 
where  they  buy  liquor  by  the  quantity  and  resort  to  drink  it." 

In  Springfield,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Ide  says,  (p.  354,)  "  the  sale  of 
liquor  is  about  as  open  as  the  doors  are." 

In  Pittsfield,  Judge  Page  says,  (p.  375,)  "  intemperance  has 
increased  faster  than  the  population." 

Upon  a  careful  inquiry  into  the  present  condition  of  things 
throughout  the  State,  it  would  probably  appear  that  in  the 
small  towns  there  is  hardly  any  liquor  sold,  but  that  in  all  the 
large  cities  and  towns  it  can  be  had  without  difficulty  ;  that  in 
most  of  them  the  sales  are  open,  and  that  whenever  by 
peculiarly  vigorous  efforts  the  open  places  are  closed,  large 
numbers  of  secret  places  are  established  and  the  cases  of 
drunkenness  largely  increased.  The  mere  fact  that  the  law 
seeks  to  prevent  them  from  drinking,  rouses  the  determination 
to  drink  in  many  ;  the  fact  that  the  place  is  secret  takes  away 
the  restraint  upon  them,  which  in  more  public  and  respectable 
places  would  keep  them  within  temperate  bounds.  The  fact 
that  the  business  is  contraband  and  liable  to  interruption,  and 
its  gains  hazardous,  tends  to  drive  honest  men  from  it  and  to 
leave  it  in  the  control  of  dishonest  men  who  will  not  scruple  to 
poison  the  community  with  vile  adulterations. 

Another  serious  result  in  the  operations  of  the  present  law 
is  the  immoral  business  practices  which  it  has  suggested  arid 
sanctioned.  A  man  without  violating  any  law  may  purchase 
liquors  to  the  extent  of  his  credit,  and  then  repudiate  the  debt. 
Though  the  liquors  as  articles  of  commerce  are  worth  to  him 
all  he  agreed  to  pay,  the  law  permits  him  to  hold  them  without 
making  payment.  Still  further,  a  man  may  put  all  his  property 
into  liquors  and  so  escape  the  payment  of  any  of  his  debts,  for 
his  liquors  cannot  be  attached,  as  the  officer  will  violate  the 
law  in  selling  them  upon  execution.  They  cannot  be  distrained 
for  his  taxes  even,  for  the  government  officer  is  liable  to  prose- 
cution if  he  sells.  These  attempts  to  outlaw  a  commercial 
article  whose  place  in  trade  has  been  undisputed  for  centuries, 
have  had  no  effect  in  preventing  honest  men  from  paying  their 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  19 

debts,  but  they  have  held  out  temptations  too  powerful  to  be 
resisted  by  swindlers.  It  is  unworthy  of  the  good  name  of  the 
Commonwealth  that  her  laws  should  protect  and  encourage  a 
man  who  has  bought  merchandise,  without  violating  the  law, 
in  refusing  to  pay  the  price  thereof  to  the  seller.  It  is 
unworthy  of  the  State  that  dishonest  men  should  be  enabled  to 
escape  the  payment  of  their  debts  by  converting  their  property 
into  liquors.  It  is  not  less  unworthy  that  the  State  herself, 
should,  without  compensation,  seize  and  sell  for  her  own  benefit 
articles  of  merchandise  which  the  citizen  has  bought  in 
violation  of  no  law. 


The  Committee  believe  that  the  time  has  come  when  this 
prohibitory  law,  unsound  in  theory,  inconsistent  with  the 
traditional  rights  and  liberties  of  the  people,  tempting  to  fraud 
and  protecting  those  who  commit  it,  in  many  communities  not 
enforced  because  of  thorough  disbelief  in  its  principles,  in  other 
communities,  when  enforced,  driving  the  liquor  traffic  into 
secret  places  and  so  increasing  rather  than  diminishing,  the 
amount  of  drunkenness  arid  other  crimes,  should  be  so  far 
modified  as  that  the  rights  of  the  citizen  will  be  respected,  while? 
at  the  same  time,  the  general  peace  and  order  of  the  community 
will  be  better  promoted.  Let  the  law  cease  to  attempt  to 
interfere  arbitrarily  with  what  a  man  shall  drink,  while,  nev- 
ertheless, it  places  such  regulations  as  experience  has  shown 
to  be  necessary  over  the  persons  who  may  make  the  sale  and 
the  times  and  places  when  and  where  the  sales  shall  be  made. 
Let  it  be  regarded  as  a  fact  that  the  demand  on  the  part  of 
those  who  desire,  wisely  or  unwisely,  to  use  liquors  as  a  bever- 
age, has  always  been  met,  and  always  will  be  met,  by  men  who 
will  sell,  either  under  the  law,  or  in  defiance  of  the  law,  and 
that  wise  legislation  should  recognize  and  act  upon  that  fact. 

The  Committee  have  not  undertaken  to  cure  all  the  evils 
arising  under  the  present  system ;  but  the  Bill  which  they 
report  herewith  seeks  to  remedy  the  main  defects  in  the  theory 
and  operations  of  the  law.  It  does  not  repeal  any  provisions 
of  the  existing  statutes,  nor  change  any  of  the  machinery  by 
which  the  law  is  enforced,  but  it  provides  for  two  classes  of  sales 
to  which  the  penalties  of  the  existing  statutes  shall  not  apply. 


20  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

First.  It  shall  be  lawful  for  any  person  to  sell  cider  or  beer, 
containing  less  than  three  per  cent,  of  alcohol,  (the  same  not 
being  intoxicating,)  provided  he  records  his  intention  to  sell 
with  the  city  or  town  clerk  and  gives  the  officers  of  the  law 
opportunity,  at  any  time,  to  examine  his  premises  and  liquors. 

The  Committee  were  satisfiedxupon  the  evidence  before  them, 
that  it  was  a  fatal  mistake  on  the  part  of  the  leaders  in  the 
so-called  temperance  movement  to  attempt  to  prohibit  the  sale 
of  cider  and  light  beer.  It  is  probably  possible  by  persistent 
application  for  a  man  to  take  enough  of  either  of  these  liquors 
to  become  intoxicated,  but  it  is  contrary  to  all  experience  to  say 
that  the  ordinary  use  of  these  liquors  produces  intoxication. 
In  many  parts  of  the  State  cider  is  generally  manufactured  and 
used  as  a  beverage ;  in  other  parts  of  the  State  light  beers  are 
made  and  used  in  large  quantities,  and  the  law,  so  far  from 
prohibiting  either,  ought,  in  our  opinion,  in  the  interests  of  true 
temperance,  to  encourage  their  substitution  for  the  stronger 
and  more  dangerous  liquors. 

Second.  Licenses  may  be  granted  by  the  county  commission- 
ers in  any  city  or  town,  which  shall  not  otherwise  provide,  upon 
the  recommendation  of  the  local  authorities,  to  either  one  or  all 
ot  these  three  classes,  viz. :  — 

1.  Licensed  hotel-keepers  and  common  victuallers  to  sell  to 
their  guests,  the  liquor  to  be  drank  upon  the  premises. 

2.  Wholesale  and  retail  dealers  to  sell,  in  proper  quantities, 
to  persons  carrying  the  liquor  away  from  the  premises. 

3.  Druggists  and  apothecaries   to   sell  only  for  use  in  medi- 
cine, cooking  arid  the  arts. 

Stringent  conditions  are  to  be  inserted  in  the  licenses,  pro- 
viding, among  other  things,  that  no  public  bar  shall  be  kept 
upon  the  premises,  that  no  sale  shall  be  made  on  the  Lord's 
Day  or  to  minors  or  intoxicated  or  other  unsuitable  persons, 
that  the  premises  and  liquors  shall  always  be  open  to  inspection 
by  State  and  municipal  officers,  and  that  the  license  shall  be 
revoked  upon  breach  of  any  of  its  conditions.  It  is  believed 
that  the  law  is  so  strictly  guarded  that  while  it  will  enable 
cities  and  towns  to  permit  liquors  to  be  sold  within  their  limits, 
it  will  give  them  opportunity  and  power  to  enforce  rigid  observ- 


1867.]  HOUSE—No.  415.  21 

ance  of  the  terms  of  the  license.  The  Committee  do  not  claim 
that  the  principal  result  of  this  law  will  be  to  reduce  the  quan- 
tity of  liquor  sold.  They  have  no  doubt  that  it  will  have  that 
effect  in  some  localities ;  but,  as  has  been  said,  the  quantity 
sold  will  always  depend  mainly  upon  the  demand.  But  the 
law  will  put  the  sale  into  the  hands  of  respectable  and  honest 
men,  and  thereby  insure  a  better  quality  of  liquors,  and  prevent 
the  sale  of  the  poisonous  stuff  which  produces  most  of  the  pres- 
ent drunkenness.  The  law  will  be  sustained  by  the  moral  con- 
victions of  the  people,  because  it  will  no  longer  attempt,  though 
indirectly,  to  prohibit  them  absolutely  from  using  every  kind  of 
alcoholic  beverages. 

Besides,  the  law  will  then  permit  regular  druggists  and  apoth- 
ecaries to  sell  liquors,  as  they  always  sold  them  prior  to  the 
passage  of  the  prohibitory  statute,  without  requiring  them  to 
assume  the  office  and  duties  of  city  or  town  liquor  agent.  The 
testimony  presented  by  the  College  of  Pharmacy  fully  satisfied 
the  Committee  that  this  modification  of  the  law  was  demanded 
by  common  sense  and  humanity.  It  should  never  happen 
again,  as  in  the  case  of  a  respectable  man  at  North  Bridgewater, 
that  a  regular  apothecary  should  be  prosecuted,  convicted  and 
punished  under  the  laws  of  the  Commonwealth  for  selling  alco- 
hol for  a  jeweller's  lamp,  and  a  bottle  of  wine,  ordered  by  a 
physician  for  a  dying  woman,  after  the  town  liquor  agency  had 
been  applied  to  in  vain  for  it. 

The  Committee  earnestly  suggest  to  the  legislature,  as  the 
result  of  their  observation  during  the  present  investigation, 
that  it  is  the  part  of  wisdom  to  heed  and  answer  the  petitions 
which  have  come  to  us  from  every  part  of  the  Commonwealth. 
If  it  is  done  now,  and  in  the  manner  indicated  by  them,  they 
believe  that  the  State  will  then  have  a  law  upon  the  sale  of  liquors, 
more  strict  in  its  practical  operations  than  any  that  exists  now 
in  any  country  of  the  world ;  while  at  the  same  time  the  rights 
and  liberties  of  the  citizens  will  be  respected.  Unless  this  is 
done,  and  done  speedily,  there  is  every  indication  that  in  the 
popular  reaction  which  is  sure  to  follow  this  extreme  prohibi- 
tory legislation,  the  good  points  in  the  law  will  be  swept  away 
with  the  bad,  and  the  Commonwealth  obliged  to  begin  again  in 


22  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

its  attempts  to  legislate  upon  the  sale  of  liquor.  As  good  citi- 
zens, whose  only  interest  is  to  promote  the  highest  good  of  the 
State,  we  should  not  be  deterred  by  prejudice  or  pride  of  opin- 
ion, or  the  mistaken  judgments  of  good  men,  from  reforming 
in  season  a  law  unsound  in  theory  and  bad  in  practice. 

R.  M.  MORSE,  JR.,  Norfolk, 

H.  ALEXANDER,  JR.,  Hampden, 

MOSES  A.  DOW,  Middlesex, 

On  the  part  of  the  Senate. 

HARVEY  JEWELL,  Boston, 
WM.  II.  P.  WRIGHT,  Lawrence, 
EDWARD  AVERY,  Braintree, 
ALVIN  G.  BARTLETT,  Roxbury, 
H.  A.  MADDEN,  Boston, 

On  the  part  of  the  House. 


1867.] 


HOUSE— No.  415. 


NUMBER  OF  MALE  PETITIONERS  AND  REMONSTRANTS,  ARRANGED 

BY  COUNTIES. 

[PREVIOUS    TO   MAY   8TH.J 


COUNTIES. 

Total  Vote  in  1866, 
for  Governor. 

Petitioners. 

Remonstrants. 

Berkshire,       .... 

6,373 

2,189 

805 

Bristol,    

6,787 

2,205 

2,332 

Barnstable,      .... 

2,361 

505 

Essex,     

17136 

2,477 

5,599 

Franklin,         .... 

3,895 

453 

1,112 

Hampshire,     .... 

4,104 

1,251 

437 

6,101 

2,545 

686 

Middlesex,      .... 

22,778 

7,056 

3,531 

Norfolk,  

11,259 

754 

1,936 

6,770 

697 

1,610 

Suffolk,  

14754 

11  885 

2,987 

Worcester,      .... 

15,607 

2,100 

4,242 

Dukes,    

454 

81 

Nantucket,      .... 

370 

352 

118,749 

34,963 

25,863 

24  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 


of 


In  the  Year  One  Thousand  Eight  Hundred  and  Sixty- 
Seven. 


AN  ACT 

To  regulate    the   Sale    of  Spirituous   and   Intoxicating 

Liquors. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representa- 
tives,  .in  General  Court  assembled,  and  by  the  authority  oj 
the  same,  as  follows  : — 

1  SECT.  1.     The  county  commissioners  of  the  several 

2  counties,  in  the  several  towns  of  said  counties,  and 

3  the  mayor  and  aldermen  of  the  several  cities,  in  their 

4  respective  cities,  may  grant  licenses  to  sell  wines,  ale, 

5  beer  and  other  spirituous  liquors : 

6  (1.)     To  licensed  inn-holders  and  common  victual- 

7  lers,  to   sell   the   same   to   their   guests   or  persons 

8  resorting  to  their  establishments  for  meals,  food  or 

9  lodging,  to  be  drank  on  their  premises. 

10  (2.)     To   such   number   of  persons  as  they  shall 

11  decide  the  convenience  of  their  respective  cities  or 

12  towns  require,   to   sell  such  liquors  at  wholesale  or 

13  retail,  in  quantities  of  not  less  than  one  gallon,  except 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  25 

14  in  case  when  such  liquors  are  commonly  sold  in  pack- 

15  ages  of  less  than  one  gallon,  and  in  such  case  in 

16  such  packages. 

17  (3.)     To  such  number  of  regular  apothecaries  and 

18  druggists  as  they  shall  decide  the  necessity  or  con- 

19  venience  of  their  several  cities   or   towns  requires; 

20  such  apothecaries  and  druggists  to  have  power  and 

21  authority  to  sell  such  liquors  only  to  be  used  in  the 

22  arts  and  for  culinary  and  medicinal  purposes. 

1  SECT.  2.     All  licenses  granted  under  the  authority 

2  of  this  act  shall  expire  on  the  first  day  of  May  in 

3  each  year,  and  may  be  granted  at  any  time  during  the 

4  year  for  the  remainder  thereof. 

1  SECT.  3.     No  license  shall  be  granted  in  any  year 

2  to  either  of  the  classes  of  persons  in  the  first  section 

3  mentioned  in  any  city  or  town  in  which  the  city 

4  council  of  said  city,  in  the  month  of  March  in  said 

5  year,  or  the  inhabitants  of  said  town  at  a  legal  meet- 

6  ing  thereof,  held  in  the  month  of  March  in  said  year, 

7  or  for  the  present  year  at  meetings  of  city  councils  or 

8  of  the  inhabitants  of  towns  within  sixty  days  from 

9  the   passage  of  this  act,  shall  have  passed  a  vote 

10  that  no  licenses  shall  be  granted,   or   that   licenses 

11  shall    be   granted    only   to   one    or    more    of    said 

12  classes   of  persons    in    said    section   mentioned,   in 

13  which    latter    case    licenses    may    be    granted    to 

14  persons  of  the  class  not  included   in  such   vote  of 

1 5  prohibition ;    and  it  shall   be    lawful    for    the    city 

16  council  of  such  cities,  and  the  inhabitants  of  such 

17  towns,  at  legal  meetings  called  for  that  purpose,  to 

18  fix  a  sum,  which  shall  be  paid  by  either  of  the  classes 


26  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

19  of  persons  to  the  treasurer  of  said  city  or  town,  as 

20  the  case  may  be,  before  any  license  shall  be  delivered 

21  to  any  person;  and  any  license  granted  to  any  one  of 

22  either  of  said  classes  of  persons  shall  be  delivered  by 

23  the  mayor  and  aldermen  or  county  commissioners, 

24  only  on  payment  of  the  sum  fixed  by  such  city  or 

25  town. 

1  SECT.  4.     No  license  shall  be  granted  to  any  per- 

2  son  by  the  county  commissioners  in  any  town,  unless 

3  the   person   applying   for  the  same  shall  be  recom- 

4  mended  as  a  suitable  person  to  receive  such  license, 

5  by  a  majority  of  the  board  of  selectmen  of  the  town 

6  in  which  he  resides  and  proposes  to  carry  on  his 

7  business ;  and  on  written  request  of  the  selectmen  of 

8  any  town  made  to  the  county  commissioners,  the  said 

9  commissioners   shall   forthwith    revoke   the    license 

10  granted  to  any  person,  upon  the  recommendation  of 

11  such  selectmen. 

1  SECT.  5.     All  licenses  granted  under  the  provisions 

2  of  this  act,  shall  be  upon  the  following  conditions,  to 

3  be  inserted  therein : — 

4  (1.)  That  the  licensee  shall  not  keep  or  maintain  a 

5  public  bar. 

6  (2.)  That  the  licensee  shall  not,  on  the  Lord's  Day, 

7  sell  or  give  away  to  any  person  whatever,  any  of  the 

8  liquors  prohibited  by  law   to  be  sold,  nor  any  cider, 

9  beer  or  malt  liquors,  except  in  the  case  of  a  licensed 

10  druggist  or  apothecary,  who  shall  be  permitted  to  sell 

11  such  liquors  only  in  cases  of  necessity  or  on  the  pre- 
12  scription  of  a  physician. 

13  (3.)  That  Ihe  license  shall  be  at  any  time  revocable 

14  by  the  authority  granting  the  same  ;  or  by  any  court, 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.                               27 

15  on  conviction  of  the  licensee  of  a  violation  of  the 

16  conditions  of  the  license. 

17  (4.)  That  the  licensee  will  at  all  times  permit  the 

18  liquors  so  kept  by  him  to  be  examined,  on  demand 

19  of  the  mayor  or  board  of  aldermen,  chief  of  police  or 

20  city  marshal  of  any  city,  or  by  any  police  officer  by  their 

21  direction,  or  by  the  constable  of  the  Commonwealth,  or 

22  any  of  his  deputies  by  his  direction,  or  by  the  select- 

23  men  of  any  town,  or  any  constable  by  their  direction, 

24  and  will  furnish,  when  required  by  any  of  the  persons 

25  named   as    aforesaid,  true   samples   of  any   and   all 

26  liquors  kept  by  him  for  examination  by  the  state 

27  assayer,  the  expense  of  such  assay  to  be  paid  by  such 

28  licensee ;  and  if  such  liquor  be  found  not  to  be  pure 

29  and  of  good  quality,  the  same   shall  be  liable  to  be 

30  seized  by  any  officer  upon  proper  complaint,  and  dis- 

31  posed  of  as  in  the  case  of  seizure  made  under  the 

32  provisions    of   chapter    eighty-six    of   the    General 

33  Statutes. 

34  (5.)  That  the  licensee  will  knowingly  sell  no  liquors 

35  to  any  minor,  nor  to  any  student  of  any  academy,  high 

36  school,  normal  school  or  college,  and  will  sell  to  no 

37  intoxicated  person,  and  will  not  sell  to  any  person 

38  whose  wife  shall  have  notified  such  licensee  not  to 

39  sell  to  her  husband. 

40  (6.)  That  all  liquor  sold  shall  be  taken  and  carried 

41  away  at  one  time,  and  not  be  drank  upon  the  prem- 

42  ises  of  the  licensee,  except  in  cases  of  licensed  inn- 

43  keepers  and  victuallers. 

44  (7.)  That  the  licensee  shall  carry  on  his  business 

45  only  in  the  place  to  be  designated  particularly  in  his 

46  license  by  the  number  of  the  building  and  the  name 

47  of  the  street,  lane,  alley  or  other  place  where  he 

48  proposes  to  exercise  his  employment. 


28  LICENSE  LAW.                            [May, 

1  SECT.   6.     On  complaint  of  any  person  on  oath 

2  before  a  trial  justice,  police  court,  or  the  municipal 

3  court  of  the  city  of  Boston,  setting  forth  any  specific 

4  breach  or  breaches  of  his  license  by  any  person  licensed 

5  under  the  provisions  of  this  act,  or  of  the  provisions 

6  of  section  twelve  of  the -eighty-sixth  chapter  of  the 

7  General  Statutes,  verified  by  oath,  the  justice  or  court 

8  shall   issue   a   citation   to    such   licensed    person  to 

9  appear  and  show  cause  why  his  license  should  not  be 

10  revoked;  and  if,  upon  a  hearing  of  said  complaint,  it 

11  shall  appear  to  such  justice  or  court  that  the  defend- 

12  ant  has  broken  the  conditions  of  his  license  as  alleged 

13  in  said  complaint,  the  same  shall  be  declared  to  be 

14  revoked  and  annulled,  and  all  authority  under  the 

15  same  shall  be  deemed  to  have  ceased  on  the  day  of 

16  the  service  of  such  citation  on  the  defendant;  but 

17  the  defendant  shall  have  the  right  to  appeal,  as  in 

18  case  of  defendants  in  criminal  proceedings ;  and  if, 

19  upon  final  hearing  of  the  said  complaint,  the  same 

20  shall  be  sustained,  the  license  shall  be  decreed  to  be 

21  annulled  and  revoked,  and  judgment  shall  be  entered 

22  against  the  defendant  for  the  costs  of  the  proceedings, 

23  and  he  shall  be  also  liable  to  complaint  or  indictment 

24  under  the  provisions  of  chapters  eighty^six  and  eighty- 

25  seven  of  the  General  Statutes  and  the  acts  in  addition 

26  thereto,  and  to  all  the  penalties  provided  in  the  same 

27  for  all  acts  done  by  him  after  service  upon  him  of  the 

28  citation  in  this  section  mentioned,  in  the  same  rnan- 

29  ner  and  to  the  same  extent  as  if  his  license  had  been 

30  revoked  at  that  time,  and  the  fact  of  such  license  shall 

31  be  no  defence  as.  to  any  act  done  after  the  service 

32  upon  him  of  such  citation. 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  29 

1  SECT.  7.     It  shall  be  lawful  for  any  person  who 

2  shall  comply  with  the  provisions  of  this  section  to 

3  manufacture   and  keep  for  sale  and  sell  cider,  and 

4  also  to  manufacture  and  keep  and  sell  beer  and  malt 

5  liquors  which  do  not  contain  more  than  three  per 

6  cent,  of  alcohol,  except  upon  the  Lord's  day.     Every 

7  person  except  persons  licensed  under  the  provisions 

8  of  this  act,  who  proposes  to  sell  cider  or  to  manufac- 

9  ture  or  sell  beer  and  malt  liquors,  as  provided  in  this 

10  section,  shall,  before  he  commences  such  manufacture 

11  or  sale,  file  with  the  city  clerk  or  town  clerk  of  the 

12  place  where  he  proposes  to  manufacture  or  to  make 

13  such  sales,  a  written  notice  of  his  intention  so  to  do, 

14  setting  forth  his  name,  and  the  name  of  the  street,  lane 

15  or  alley,  with  the  number  of  the  building  if  the  build- 

16  ing  shall  be  numbered,  or  if  not  numbered,  such  a 

17  description  of  the  building  and  the  location  thereof 

18  as  shall  be  sufficient  with  reasonable  certainty  to  des- 

19  ignate  the  same,  where  he  proposes  to  carry  on  such 

20  business,   which   notice   shall    be    renewed    in    the 

21  month  of  April,  in  every   year.     All    such    notices 

22  shall  be  recorded  by  the  city  clerk  or  town  clerk,  in 

23  books  to  be  kept  by  him  for  that  purpose,  and  for 

24  such  notice  he  shall  be  paid  the  sum  of  one  dollar. 

25  It  shall  be  lawful  for  the  mayor  or  aldermen,  chief  of 

26  police  or  city  marshal,  or    any  constable  or  police 

27  officer  of  any  city,  the  selectmen  ,or  constables  or 

28  police  officers  of  any  town,  or  the  constable  of  the 

29  Commonweath  or  any  of  his  deputies,  to  enter  into 

30  any  such  place  and  inspect  the  same  for  the  purpose 

31  of  ascertaining   the  manner  in  which  such  persons 

32  conduct  their  business,  and  do  all  other  things  neces- 

33  sary  to  keep  order  therein,  and  to  examine  any  and 


80  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

34  all  liquors  of  every  kind  there  found ;  and  on  demand 

35  made  by  any  such  officer  upon  any  person  found  in 

36  charge  of  such  place,  or  engaged   in  any  business 

37  therein,  true  samples  of  all  liquors  there  found  shall 

38  be  delivered  to  the  officer,  for  examination  and   assay 

39  by  the  state  assayer ;  and  -  if  such  officer  shall  have 

40  reasonable  cause  to  believe  the  same  are  not  of  the 

41  kind  or  quality  of  liquors  mentioned  in  this  section, 

42  he  may  make  complaint  as  is  provided  in  cases  of 

43  seizure  in  chapter  eighty-six  of  the  General  Statutes  ; 

44  and  if  upon  examination  and  assay  of  such  liquors, 

45  the  same  are  found  not  to  be  of  the  kind  or   quality 

46  described  in  this  section,  the  said  liquors  may  be  pro- 

47  ceeded  against  in  the  manner  provided  in  case  of 

48  seizures  in  the  provisions   of  chapter  eighty-six  of 

49  the  General  Statutes,  and  the  keeper  of  such  place 

50  shall  be  liable  to  all  the  penalties  provided  in  chapters 

51  eighty-six  and  eighty-seven  of  the  General  Statutes, 

52  and  the  acts  in  addition  to  the  same.     In  all  cases  of 

53  complaint  or  indictment  of  any  person  for  a  violation 

54  of  the   provisions  of  chapters   eighty-six  or    eighty- 

55  seven,  the  burden  shall  be  upon  the  defendant,  to 

56  show  that  he  has  given  the  required  notice  to  the 

57  city  clerk  or  town  clerk,  and  so  has  acquired  the 

58  right  to  sell  the  liquors  in  this  section  mentioned. 

1  SECT.  8.     Licensed  manufacturers  of  spirituous  or 

2  intoxicating  liquors,  in  addition  to  the  sales  author- 

3  ized  to  be  made  by  them  by  section  twelve  of  the 

4  eighty-sixth   chapter  of  the   General   Statutes,  may 

5  sell  any  of  the  liquors   manufactured   by   them,  in 

6  quantities  not  less  than  thirty  gallons,  to  any  party 

7  licensed  as  is  herein  provided,  and  the  bond  to  be 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  31 

8  given  by  such  manufacturer,  as  required  by  section 

9  thirteen  of  said  act,  shall  be  modified  accordingly. 

1  SECT.  9.     None  of  the  provisions  and  penalties  of 

2  existing  laws  against  the  sale,  or  the  keeping  for  sale, 

3  of  intoxicating  or  spirituous  liquors,  shall  apply  to 

4  parties,  or  their  business,  who  hold  licenses  under  this 

5  act   while   such   license   remains   in   full   force   and 

6  unreVoked,  and  while  the  parties  holding  the  same 

7  faithfully  comply  with  and  fully  perform  all  the  con- 

8  ditions  thereof,  except  as  provided  in  the  sixth  section 

9  of  this  act. 

1  SECT.  10.     The  places  of  business  and  liquors  kept 

2  therein  for  sale,  of  all  parties  receiving  licenses  under 

3  this  act,  shall  at  all  times  be  subject  -to  inspection  by 

4  the  mayors  or  any  of  the  aldermen,  or  any  of  the 

5  police   officers  of  cities,  or  the  state  constable,  or  any 

6  of  his  deputies,  or  by  the  selectmen   of  towns,  or  by 

7  the    police   officers    or    constables    of    such  towns, 

8  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  the  manner  in  which 

9  such  licensed  parties   conduct  their    business;    and 

10  such  officers  shall   at  all  times  have  the  right   for 

11  the  purposes  aforesaid,  to  enter  said  places  of  busi- 

12  ness,  and  to  do  all  things  necessary  to  preserve  order 

13  therein,  and  secure  the  due  observance  of  the  law  by 

14  the  proprietors  and  managers  of  said  licensed  places. 

15  Any  resistance  or  obstruction  of  any  of  said  officers 

16  while  in  the  due  execution  of  the  powers  herein  con- 

17  ferrcd,  by  the  proprietor  or  cccupant  of  such  place  of 

18  business,  or   by  his   employees  or   servants  by  his 

19  direction,  shall  be  deemed  and  taken  as  a  forfeiture  of 

20  the  license  held  by  such  proprietor  or  occupant. 


32  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

1  SECT  11.      Nothing  in  this   act  shall  affect  any 

2  offences  heretofore  committed,  or  the  punishment  of 

3  the  same,  or  any  proceedings  now  pending. 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  33 


MINORITY    REPORT. 


HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES,  May  14, 1867. 

The  undersigned,  a  minority  of  the  Committee,  to  whom  were 
referred  the  Petitions  of  Alpheus  Hardy  and  others,  asking 
for  the  enactment  of  "  A  judicious  License  Law,  for  the 
regulation  and  control  of  the  sale  of  spirituous  and  fermented 
liquors  in  the  Commonwealth,"  and  to  whom  was  also  referred 
the  Petition  of  the  officers  and  trustees  of  the  Massachu- 
setts College  of  Pharmacy,  for  an  alteration  of  "  the  present 
law,  in  such  way  that  the  apothecaries  may  be  able  to  con- 
duct their  business  in  a  legal  manner,"  and  to  whom  were 
also  referred  numerous  Remonstrances  against  the  passage  of 
a  license  law, — being  unable  to  agree  with  a  majority  of  the 
Committee  in  the  conclusions  which  they  have  reached, 
respectfully  submit  the  following 

REPORT: 

We  propose  to  consider  the  petitions  of  Mr.  Hardy  and  others 
first,  and  that  of  the  College  of  Pharmacy  afterwards.  It  is 
claimed  that  there  are  about  thirty-five  thousand  signers  to  the 
petitions  for  a  license  law. 

The  number  of  remonstrances  is  about  three  hundred  and 
seventy,  coming  from  at  least  two  hundred  towns  and  cities  of 
the  Commonwealth ;  from  nine  "  temperance  unions,"  each 
union  embracing  several  towns ;  from  a  large  number  of 
churches  and  Sunday  schools ;  from  nine  Christian  conventions, 
held  in  different  parts  of  the  State ;  from  the  New  England 
Methodist  Episcopal  Conference ;  from  several  associations  of 
Congregational  clergymen,  and  from  numerous  temperance 
organizations  ;  from  the  president  and  students  of  Williams 
College ;  from  the  faculty  and  students  of  Andover  Theological 
Seminary ;  from  one  hundred  and  sixtyjthree  students  of 

5 


34  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

Amherst  College,  and  from  more  than  two  hundred  and  fifty 
clergymen  of  Massachusetts. 

The  number  of  remonstrants  given,  is  between  sixty  and 
seventy  thousand.  There  are  several  remonstrances  from  socie- 
ties and  organizations  wherein  the  numbers  are  not  given.  It 
is  believed  that  the  number  represented  by  this  last  class  of 
remonstrances,  added  to  the  number  given,  would  make  the 
whole  number  of  remonstrants  not  less  than  eighty  thousand. 

The  subject-matter  of  these  petitions  is  not  new,  nor  are  the 
.facts  and  arguments  offered  in  support  of  them  novel. 

The  law  now  in  force  in  this  Commonwealth,  regulating  the 
manufacture  and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors,  was  passed  in  the 
year  1855.  Numerous  unsuccessful  attempts  have  been  made 
from  year  to  year  since  that  time,  to  induce  the  legislature  to 
repeal  or  modify  this  law.  The  present  attempt  has  not  dif- 
fered from  those  which  have  preceded  it,  except,  perhaps,  there 
has  been  a  more  elaborate  preparation  and  presentation  of  the 
evidence,  and  certainly  there  has  been  greater  learning,  ability 
and  eloquence  displayed  in  the  discussions  before  the  Commit- 
tee. Bat  the  essential  character  of  this  effort  to  induce  a 
change  in  the  existing  law,  does  not  differ  from  those  which 
have  heretofore  been  so  often  made  without  success.  The  sub- 
ject to  which  these  petitions  relate  is  one  which  has,  for  many 
years,  occupied  the  public  attention.  It  is  one  with  which 
every  intelligent  citizen  is  familiar, — one  upon  which  he  has 
clear  and  well  settled  opinions, — founded  upon  evidence  so 
ample  and  substantial,  and  so  entirely  within  the  reach  of  all 
honest  inquirers  after  truth,  that  they  are  not  likely  to  be  dis- 
turbed or  unsettled  by  the  half  resolved  and  disputed  theories 
of  scientific  speculators. 

To  those  who  know  that  the  prisons  of  the  country,  as  well 
as  the  poor-houses  and  hospitals,  have,  from  year  to  year  and 
from  generation  to  generation,  been  filled  with  the  victims  of 
intemperance,  the  speculations  of  the  scientific  schools  as  to 
whether  alcohol  is  respiratory  or  plastic  food,  or  indeed  food  at 
all,  seem  but  learned  trifles,  when  offered  as  the  basis  of  intelli- 
gent legislation.  It  has  appeared  to  us  that  the  petitioners, 
while  pursuing  these  lines  of  inquiry  into  the  regions  of  curious 
and  recondite  scientific  discoveries  or  guesses,  have  quite  mis- 
apprehended and  misstated  the  grounds  on  which  all  laws  upon 


1867.]  HOUSE—No.  415.  35 

the  subject  under  consideration  are  and  should  be  founded. 
The  late  most  distinguished  Chief  Justice  Shaw,  in  giving  the 
opinion  of  the  court  in  a  case  which  arose  under  the  first  Maine 
Law,  as  it  was  called,  passed  in  this  State  in  the  year  1852, 
said  :  "  We  have  no  doubt  that  it  is  competent  for  the  legisla- 
ture to  declare  the  possession  of  certain  articles  of  property, 
either  absolutely,  or  when  held  in  particular  places  and  under 
particular  circumstances,,  to  be  unlawful,  because  they  would  be 
injurious,  dangerous,  or  noxious ;  and  by  due  process  of  law, 
to  provide  both  for  the  abatement  of  the  nuisance  and  the  pun- 
ishment of  the  offender,  by  seizure  and  confiscation  of  the  prop- 
erty, by  the  removal,  sale  or  destruction  of  the  noxious 
articles." 

In  another  case  arising  under  an  earlier  statute,  upon  this 
same  general  subject,  the  same  eminent  judge  said :  "  The  court 
rests  its  decision  upon  the  proposition  that  to  promote  the 
peace,  order  and  security  of  the  community,  to  prevent  the 
evils  of  vice,  riot,  pauperism,  and  the  temptation  to  crime," 
government  has  the  right  to  regulate  and  control  the  sale  of 
spirituous  liquor  or  the  places  where  it  is  to  be  sold. 

The  late  chief  justice  of  the  supreme  court  of  the  United 
States,  in  giving  his  opinion  in  what  are  called  the  license 
cases,  (5  Howard,  504,)  says:  "  Every  State  may  regulate  its  own 
internal  traffic,  according  to  its  own  judgment,  and  upon  its 
own  views  of  the  interest  and  well-being  of  its  citizens.  Al- 
though a  State  is  bound  to  receive  and  to  permit  the  sale  by 
the  importer  of  any  article  of  merchandise  which  Congress 
authorizes  to  be  imported,  it  is  not  bound  to  furnish  a  market 
for  it,  nor  to  abstain  from  the  passage  of  any  law  which  it  may 
deem  necessary  or  advisable  to  guard  the  health  or  morals  of 
its  citizens,  although  such  law  may  discourage  importations,  or 
diminish  the  profits  of  the  importer,  or  lessen  the  revenue  of 
the  general  government.  And  if  any  State  deems  the  retail 
and  internal  traffic  in  ardent  spirits  injurious  to  its  citizens  and 
calculated  to  produce  idleness,  vice  or  debauchery,  I  see  nothing 
in  the  constitution  of  the  United  States  to  prevent  it  from  reg- 
ulating and  restraining  the  traffic,  or  from  prohibiting  it 
altogether." 

Justice  McLean  in  the  same  cases  says :  "  If  the  foreign 
article  (spirits)  be  injurious  to  the  health  or  morals  of  the  com- 


'36  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

munitj,  a  State  may,  in  the  exercise  of  that  great  and  conser- 
vative police  power  which  lies  at  the  foundation  of  its  prosperity ', 
prohibit  the  sale  of  it" 

Justice  Grier,  in  the  same  cases,  says  :  "  The  true  question 
presented  by  these  cases  is  whether  the  States  have  a  right  to 
prohibit  the  sale  and  consumption  of  an  article  of  commerce 
which  they  believe  to  be  pernicious  in  its  effects  and  the  cause 
of  disease,  pauperism  and  crime.  It  is  not  necessary  for  the 
sake  of  justifying  the  State  legislation  now  under  considera- 
tion, to  array  the  appalling  statistics  of  misery,  pauperism  and 
crime  which  have  their  origin  in  the  use  or  abuse  of  ardent 
spirits.  The  police  power  which  is  exclusively  in  the  State,  is 
alone  competent  to  the  correction  of  these  great  evils,  and  all 
measures  of  restraint  or  prohibition  necessary  to  effect -the  pur- 
pose are  within  the  scope  of  that  authority ;  and  if  a  loss  of 
revenue  should  accrue  to  the  United  States  from  a  diminished 
consumption  of  ardent  spirits,  she  will  be  the  gainer  a  thousand 
fold  in  the  wealth  and  happiness  of  the  people." 

These  practical  expositions  of  the  duties  and  rights  of  gov- 
ernment, given  under  the  high  responsibility  of  official  trust, 
by  those  whose  life-long  business  it  has  been  to  study  and 
expound  the  constitution  and  laws  under  which  we  live,  and  are 
now  acting,  set  forth  in  a  clear  and  forcible  manner  the  true 
grounds  on  which  the  system  of  laws  we  are  considering  rests. 
And  they  stand  in  striking  contrast  to  the  opinions  expressed 
by  several  witnesses  who  appeared  before  the  Committee  to 
declare,  with  but  little  apparent  reflection  upon  the  subject,  that 
a  law  prohibiting  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  was  an  unau- 
thorized exercise  of  power  on  the  part  of  government,  and 
an  unjust  infringement  of  private  rights.  It  is  undoubtedly 
true  that  the  opinions  from  which  the  foregoing  citations  are 
made,  were  given  in  exposition  and  illustration  of  the  relative 
powero  and  duties  of  the  general  and  State  governments.  But 
they  also  unequivocally  show,  that  the  States  have  the  power, 
in  the  exercise  of  that  great  conservative  right  of  self-preserva- 
tion, to  pass  laws  restraining  or  wholly  prohibiting  the  sale  of 
"  articles  of  commerce  "  which  are  found  to  be  productive  of 
irreparable  injury  to  the  community.  And  if  there  is  a  bene- 
ficial and  an  injurious  use  which  may  be  made  of  such  articles, 
then  beyond  all  controversy  the  State  may  permit  the  first  and 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  37 

prohibit  the  latter.  And  it  would  be  as  clearly  a  violation  of 
all  moral  duty  on  the  part  of  government  to  license,  and  thus 
legalize  the  injurious  use,  as  it  would  be  a  wanton  and  despotic 
exercise  of  power  to  forbid  the  beneficial  use,  if  the  one  can  be 
separated  from  the  other.  And  it  is  upon  this  precise  distinc- 
tion that  the  system  of  laws  under  discussion  is  founded.  In 
this  connection,  and  in  reference  to  the  opinions  of  witnesses 
to  whom  allusion  has  just  been  made,  we  cannot  forbear  to 
quote  the  language  of  Rev.  Dr.  Channing  when  discoursing 
upon  the  rights  of  government  in  relation  to  this  class  of 
laws  : — "  This  is  a  case  which  stands  by  itself,  which  can  be 
confounded  with  no  other,  and  on  which  government  from  its 
very  nature  and  end  is  particularly  bound  to  act.  Let  it  never 
be  forgotten  that  the  great  end  of  government,  its  highest  func- 
tion, is  not  to  make  roads,  grant  charters,  originate  improve- 
ments, but  to  prevent  or  redress  crimes  against  individual 
rights  and  social  order.  For  this  end  it  ordains  a  criminal 
code.  Now  if  it  be  true  that  a  vast  proportion  of  the  crimes 
which  government  is  instituted  to  prevent  and  redress,  have 
their  origin  in  the  use  of  ardent  spirits,  if  our  poor-houses, 
work-houses,  jails  and  penitentiaries  are  tenanted  in  great 
degree  by  those  whose  first  and  chief  impulse  to  crime  came 
from  the  distillery  and  the  dram-shop,  if  murder  and  theft,  the 
most  fearful  outrages  on  property  and  life,  are  most  frequently 
the  issues  and  consummation  of  intemperance,  is  not  govern- 
ment bound  to  restrain  by  legislation  the  vending  of  the 
stimulus  to  these  terrible  social  wrongs  ?  " 

Having  thus  exhibited  the  principle  on  which  the  laws  in 
question  are  based,  and  that  they  are  in  complete  harmony 
with  the  twofold  government  (State  and  Federal,)  under 
which  we  live,  let  us  next  inquire  what  modifications  or 
changes  are  sought  for  by  the  petitioners.  At  the  close  of  their 
evidence,  their  counsel  submitted  the  following  propositions  as 
embodying  the  essential  principles  of  such  a  license  law  as  they 
would  have  the  legislature  adopt : — 

"  1.  That  the  several  municipalities  of  the  Commonwealth  be  allowed 
by  law  to  permit  the  retail  sale,  under  municipal  regulation,  and  subject 
also  to  police  regulation  by  the  Commonwealth,  of  spirituous  and  fer- 
mented liquors,  by  taverners,  victuallers,  grocers  and  apothecaries ; 


38  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

licenses  being  granted,  in  such  numbers  and  to  such  persons  as  the 
public  convenience  may,  in  the  judgment  of  the  municipality,  require. 

"  2.  All  licensed  placesi  shall  be  subject  to  police  visitation,  and  the 
liquors  kept  for  sale  shall  be  subject  to  inspection  under  superintendence 
of  a  board  of  commissioners  appointed  by  the  governor ;  such  regula- 
tions being  enacted  by  law  relative  thereto  as  will  best  promote  the 
purity  of  the  liquors  offered  for  sale,  and  guard  the  people  against 
imposition  by  adulteration  or  otherwise. 

"  3.  The  existing  provisions  of  law-  which  forbid  the  manufacture  of 
cider  and  its  sale  by  the  manufacturer,  and  those  also  which  forbid  the 
sale  of  spirituous  and  fermented  liquors  at  wholesale  (or  in  quantities  of 
not  less  than  twenty-eight  gallons  in  each  package,)  and  those  which 
forbid  their  manufacture  to  be  sold  according  to  law,  should  be  repealed. 

"  4.  The  provisions  of  the  existing  statutes  shall  remain  in  force 
against  all  persons  manufacturing  or  selling  contrary  to  law,  whether 
without  license  or  in  violation  of  their  license." 

• 

They  complain  that  the  present  prohibitory  law,  as  it  is 
called,  is  too  restrictive,  that  it  transcends  the  legitimate  sphere 
of  government  and  invades  the  rights  of  the  citizen.  And  they 
affirm  that  it  cannot  be  enforced  or  executed  as  it  now  stands. 

The  law,  against  which  these  grave  charges  are  made,  though 
called  prohibitory,  is  in  fact  a  law  to  regulate  the  manufacture 
and  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors.  It  authorizes  the  manufacture 
of  these  liquors  and  their  sale  by  the  manufacturer  in  quanti- 
ties not  less  than  thirty  gallons,  to  be  exported  or  to  be  used  in 
the  arts  or  for  mechanical  and  chemical  purposes  in  this  State. 

It  allows  their  sale  by  duly  appointed  agents  in  every  town 
and  city  in  the  Commonwealth,  to  be  used  in  the  arts  or  for 
mechanical,  medicinal  and  chemical  purposes. 

A  chemist,  artist  or  manufacturer  in  whose  trade  they  may 
be  necessary,  may  keep  at  his  place  of  business  spirituous 
liquors  for  use  in  such  art  or  trade,  and  any  person  may  man- 
ufacture or  sell  cider  in  any  quantity  for  other  purposes  than 
that  of  a  beverage. 

The  importer  of  liquors  of  foreign  production  may  sell  the 
same  in  original  packages. 

And  under  the  provisions  of  this  law  every  respectable  drug- 
gist and  apothecary  in  the  Commonwealth  can  be  appointed  an 
agent  with  authority  to  sell  the  liquors  named,  for  all  the  legal 
purposes  above  enumerated. 


1867.]  '  HOUSE— No.  415.  39 

And  the  law  further  provides  for  the  appointment  of  a  Com- 
missioner, whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  supply  all  these  agencies. 
And  all  liquors  kept  for  sale  by  him,  shall  be  analyzed  by  one 
of  the  State  assayers,  and  no  spirituous  and  intoxicating  liquors 
are  to  be  sold  by  him  except  such  as  one  of  said  assayers  in 
writing  certifies  to  be  pure.  Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  this  law, 
almost  universally  spoken  of  as  prohibitory,  is  one  of  regula- 
tion, and  contains  the  most  ample  and  elaborate  provisions  for 
the  supply  and  distribution  of  spirituous  liquors  to  every  part 
of  the  Commonwealth,  for  all  the  purposes  for  which  science 
has  demonstrated,  or  the  public  welfare  shown,  that  these  arti- 
cles of  commerce  can  be  safely  and  usefully  employed.  The 
provisions  of  this  law  permitting  the  manufacture  of  these 
liquors  for  exportation  has  been  commented  upon  as  incon- 
sistent with  the  principle  upon  which  the  law  is  founded.  A 
moment's  reflection  will  satisfy  any  fair-minded  man  that  this 
criticism  is  unsupported  by  any  just  view  of  the  subject.  As 
has  been  shown,  the  law  recognizes  a  great  variety  of  uses  to 
which  spirituous  liquors  may  be  properly  devoted.  And  it  is 
no  more  a  violation  of  the  principle  of  the  law,  to  allow  these 
articles  to  be  manufactured  for  exportation  to  other  States  or 
countries,  where  they  may  be  used  in  the  arts,  than  to  permit 
them  to  be  manufactured  and  sold  for  those  purposes  within 
this  State.  If  after  they  reach  a  foreign  jurisdiction,  they 
should  be  employed  for  injurious  rather  than  useful  purposes, 
that  is  a  matter  entirely  beyond  the  power  or  control  of  Massa- 
chusetts law — that  must  be  regulated  by  the  law  of  the  place 
where  the  consumption  of  these  articles  takes  place.  Again,  it 
is  said  this  law  trenches  upon  or  invades  the  rights  of  the  citizen. 
If  by  this  is  meant  that  the  law  forbids  and  restrains  men  from 
doing  some  things  they  might  do  were  no  such  law  in  existence, 
then  the  charge  is  well  founded.  If  it  means  more  than  this, 
then  it  affirms  of  this  law  only  that  which  is  true  of  every  penal 
statute  forbidding  an  act  which,  without  the  law,  might  be 
legal ;  as,  for  instance,  the  law  forbidding  the  sale  of  lottery 
tickets  in  this  Commonwealth  and  many  other  similar  statutes 
which  might  be  named.  But  precisely  the  same  charge  can  be 
made  against  the  law  which  the  petitioners  ask  the  legislature 
to  pass.  For  under  the  most  liberal  administration  of  that  law 
not  more  than  one  man  in  a  thousand  will  be  able  to  obtain  a 


40  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

license,  and  the  petitioners  ask  that  "  the  provisions  of  the 
existing  statutes  shall  remain  in  force  against  all  persons  man- 
ufacturing or  selling  contrary  to  law,  whether  without  license 
or  in  violation  of  their  license."  And  more  than  this,  by  the 
terms  of  the  proposed  law  each  city  and  town  is  to  have  the 
power  to  determine  whether  or  not  to  permit  the  sale  of  these 
"  articles  of  commerce  "  within  its  own  territorial  limits.  Now 
if  it  is  an  unauthorized  assumption  of  power,  and  an  unjust 
interference  with  the  rights,  either  of  the  seller  or  buyer  or 
both,  for  a  majority  of  the  people  of  the  Commonwealth  to 
declare  by  a  single  and  direct  act  of  their  legislature,  that 
intoxicating  liquor  shall  not  be  sold  in  this  State  to  be  used  as 
a  beverage,  how  is  it  any  the  less  so,  for  that  same  majority  to 
establish  the  same  prohibitory  rule  or  law,  by  voting  directly 
upon  the  question  in  the  several  municipalities  of  the  Common- 
wealth, according  to  the  provisions  of  the  law  proposed  by  the 
petitioners  ?  And  if  it  is  an  act  of  oppression — an  interference 
with  private  rights,  for  the  majority  to  establish  such  a  law  for 
all  the  towns,  it  would  be  equally  oppressive  for  majorities  in 
half  or  one-quarter  of  the  towns  to  establish  it  as  a  rule  of  action 
for  all  the  citizens  of  such  towns  as  should  adopt  the  law.  The 
objection  we  are  now  considering  originates,  as  before  stated, 
in  a  total  misapprehension  of  the  theory  upon  which  this  class 
of  laws  is  founded — founded,  as  we  affirm,  on  "  that  great  con- 
servative police  power  ivhich  lies  at  the  foundation  of  the 
prosperity  of  every  State" 

Society  and  the  State  have  the  right  to  protect  themselves 
against  great  and  overwhelming  evils;  and  if  to  prevent  these  evils 
it  becomes  necessary  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  intoxicating  bev- 
erages, the  use  of  which  is  the  known  cause  of  such  evils,  even 
if  the  prohibition  results  in  depriving  the  individual  citizen  of 
the  power  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  to  buy  and  use  those  arti- 
cles, that  is  a  deprivation  to  which  it  is  his  duty  to  submit,  and 
he  cannot  call  upon  the  State  or  the  whole  society  to  forego  the 
execution  of  its  great  right  of  self-preservation  or  its  duty  "  to 
prevent  and  redress  crimes  against  individuals." 

Again  it  is  urged,  as  if  it  were  a  valid  objection  against  the 
law  or  system  of  laws  we  are  now  considering,  that  men  can- 
not be  made  moral  by  an  Act  of  the  legislature.  That  is  true, 
but  then  it  is  clearly  within  the  legitimate  scope  and  duty  of 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  41 

legislation  to  guard  against  the  corruption  of  morals.  Men 
are  not  made  rich  by  Act  of  Congress  or  Parliament,  but  it  is 
within  the  acknowledged  province  of  legislation,  to  prevent  the 
causes  of  poverty,  and  to  make  it  impossible  or  at  least  unlaw- 
ful for  any  class  of  citizens  to  pursue  courses  of  trade  or  busi- 
ness, which  cast  heavy  burdens  of  taxation  upon  the  State,  and 
to  that  extent  impoverish  and  hinder  honest  industry  in  the 
acquisition  of  wealth.  If  men  cannot  be  made  moral  and  good 
by  legislation,  the  legislature  has  at  least  the  power  and  the 
right  to  forbid  and  punish  a  traffic  which  uniformly  makes  men 
criminal  and  vicious.  And  it  is  on  this  ground  that  the  law 
forbids  and  punishes  with  heavy  penalties,  the  sale  of  intoxi- 
cating liquors  as  beverages.  It  is  not  simply  because  alcohol 
is  a  poison,  or  that  its  use  as  a  beverage  is  an  immorality,  that 
the  traffic  in  it  is  forbidden  for  such  purpose,  but  for  the  reason 
that  that  traffic,  resulting  in  that  use,  produces  a  vast  amount 
of  crime,  poverty,  disease  and  general  demoralization,  followed 
by  what  would  be  otherwise  unnecessary  taxation  to  support  the 
pauperism  thus  created,  and  to  protect  society  from  the 
disastrous  consequences  of  crime  thus  occasioned. 

It  is  not  from  the  employment  of  alcoholic  liquors  in  the 
arts,  but  from  their  use  as  a  beverage,  that  the  evils  complained 
of  result ;  and  the  difference  between  the  existing  law  and  the 
one  asked  for  by  these  petitioners,  is  just  the  difference  between 
good  and  evil,  unless  "  the  appalling  statistics  of  intemperance," 
gathered  from  numberless  sources  and  over  the  widest  fields  of 
observation,  are  altogether  at  fault.  The  law,  as  it  now  is, 
permits  and  authorizes  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  these 
liquors  for  all  useful  purposes  ;  the  license  law  asked  for  would 
not  only  do  this,  but  would  legalize  their  sale  for  a  purpose 
which,  by  an  inevitable  and  uniform  practice  leads  to  the 
disastrous  consequences  which  have  been  enumerated. 

That  the  common  and  intemperate  use  of  these  liquors  is  the 
fruitful  source  of  crime^and  poverty,  and  consequent  unjust 
taxation  upon  honest  industry,  cannot  be  doubted  by  any  intel- 
ligent man  who  will  bestow  upon  the  question  an  impartial 
inquiry.  We  shall  cite  only  a  few  of  the  many  thousand  wit- 
nesses that  might  be  called  to  the  stand  upon  this  subject. 
The  following  are  the  declarations  of  some  of  the  most 
intelligent  and  able  judges  of  the  English  courts : — 


42  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

Judge  COLERIDGE  :  "  There  is  scarcely  a  crime  comes  before  me 
that  is  not,  directly  or  indirectly,  caused  by  strong  drink." 

Judge  GUERNEY  :  "  Every  crime  has  its  origin,  more  or  less,  in 
drunkenness." 

Judge  PATTERSON  :  "If  it  were  not  for  this  drinking  you  (the  jury) 
and  I  would  have  nothing  to  do." 

Judge  ALDERSON  :  "  Drunkenness  is  the  most  fertile  source  of  crime  ; 
and  if  it  could  be  removed  the  assizes  of  the  country  would  be  rendered 
mere  nullities." 

Judge  WIGIITMAN  :  "  I  find  in  my  calendar  that  comes  before  me, 
one  unfailing  source,  directly  or  indirectly,  of  the  most  of  the  crimes 
that  are  committed — intemperance." 

To  this  testimony  of  the  English  judges  might  be  added  that 
of  the  judges  of  every  criminal  court  in  America,  and  that  of 
every  public  prosecuting  officer.  And  no  amount  of  decla- 
mation, no  amount  of  ingenious  speculation,  can  reverse  the 
judgment  of  mankind,  that  intemperance,  occasioned  by  the 
use  of  intoxicating  liquors,  is  the  great  and  abounding  cause 
of  a  large  share  of  all  the  crimes  committed  in  every  civilized 
country  on  the  face  of  the  globe. 

Our  own  Board  of  State  Charities,  in  their  animal  report 
for  the  year  1866,  speaking  of  the  criminals  who  had  been  con- 
fined in  the  prisons  of  the  Commonwealth  during  that  year,  use 
the  following  language  : — 

"  The  nativity  of  3,007  prisoners,  or  a  little  more  than  one-fourth 
was  in  Massachusetts,  but  the  number  whose  parents  were  both  Ameri- 
cans, was  but  2,589,  considerably  less  than  one-fourth.  Seven  thousand 
three  hundred  and  forty-three,  or  about  two-thirds.,  are  set  down  as 
intemperate,  but  this  number  is  known  to  be  too  small.  Probably  more 
than  eighty  per  cent,  come  within  this  class.  Intemperance  being 
the  chief  occasion  of  crime,  as  it  is  of  Pauperism,  and  (in  a  less  degree,) 
of  insanity." 

Judge  Sanger,  called  by  the  petitioners,  and  who,  as  judge 
and  district-attorney,  has  been  for  many  years  familiar  with  the 
criminal  courts  of  the  Commonwealth,  and  especially  in  the 
county  of  Suffolk,  was  asked  if  he  had  any  opinion  whether  the 
burden  of  taxation  is  increased  by  the  present  drinking  usages  ? 
To  which  he  answered: — 


1867.]  HOUSE—No.  415.  43 

"  I  have  no  doubt  it  is  largely." 

"  How  much  would  it  be,  in  your  opinion,  in  this  Commonwealth  ?  " 
"  I  could  not  give  the  percentage.     I  think  a  large  portion  of  the 
criminal  costs  of  the  Commonwealth  are  from  that  cause.     There  are 
very  few  cases  into  which  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  does  not  more  or 
less  enter." 

The  Hon.  Mr.  Evans,  a  member  of  the  executive  council, 
made  a  most  valuable  statement  before  the  Committee  upon 
the  subject  now  under  consideration,  of  which  the  following  is 
a  summary : — 

For  support  of  inmates  of  twenty  institutions  for  town 

paupers  and  for  prisons,  annually,      ....  $1,500,000  00 
Ten  per  cent,  upon  cost  of  construction  of  twenty  institu- 
tions,         .  236,072  00 

Ten  per  cent,  upon  valuation  of  town  almshouses, .         .  172,598  00 

Ten  per  cent,  on  costs  of  prisons  and  houses  of  correction,  150,000  00 
Five  per  cent,  on  costs  of  court  houses,  (allowing  half 
the  use  to  be  for  other  purposes  than  those  connected 

with  the  administration  of  criminal  law,)    .         .         .  45,000  00 

Private  organized  charities, 1,000,000  00 

Private  unorganized  charities,  (estimated,)    .         .         .  1,000,000  00 

Criminal  costs  above  receipts  or  fines,  ....  133,000  00 


Total, .  $4,237,000  00 

Compare  these  figures  with  the  statement  of  the  percentage 
of  crime  and  pauperism  occasioned  by  intemperance,  arid  some 
idea  can  be  formed  of  the  annual  costs  to  the  Commonwealth  of 
that  traffic,  which  it  is  now  seriously  urged  upon  the  legislature 
to  legalize  and  license.  And  in  view  of  these  startling  statistics, 
it  is  not  strange  that  one  of  the  most  intelligent  witnesses  called 
by  the  petitioners,  Ex-Governor  Washburn,  should  feel  com- 
pelled to  admit,  as  he  did  in  his  elaborate  statement  to  the 
Committee,  "I  do  consider  the  selling  of  liquors  under 
licenses  to  be  a  moral  evil."  And  in  another  part  of  his  tes- 
timony, he  said,  if  "  I  could  prohibit  the  sale  of  these  liquors  as  a 
beverage  I  would,"  and  "  if  I  could  enforce  the  present  prohib- 
itory law  I  would ; "  showing  that  he,  one  of  the  most  distin- 
guished citizens  and  once  the  governor  of  the  Commonwealth, 
and,  at  an  earlier  period,  a  judge  in  one  of  its  courts,  and  now 


44  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

a  professor  and  teacher  of  law  in  the  leading  university  of  the 
country,  entertains  none  of  those  crude  and  half-formed  opin- 
ions as  to  the  rights  of  citizens  and  the  powers  and  duties  of 
government  as  would  make  it  an  unauthorized  act  on  the  part 
of  government  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors. 

It  is  due  to  this  witness  to  say,  that  he  also  expressed  the 
opinion  that  it  would  be  a  less  evil  to  license  the  sale  rather 
than  to  suffer  the  traffic  to  go  on  as  he  understood  it  to  be  con- 
ducted at  present.  That  is,  the  hope  was  expressed  that  the 
evil  might  be  restrained  and  limited  by  licensing  it.  In  other 
words,  a  vice  or  an  evil  is  to  be  rendered  less  by  throwing  over 
it  the  protection  and  respectability  which  come  from  govern- 
mental sanction  and  authority.  Herein  lies  the  fallacy  of  the 
whole  license  system.  For  since  it  has  been  declared  by  an 
elder  and  higher  law  than  any  merely  human  enactment,  that 
it  shall  never  be  lawful  for  individuals  to  do  evil  that  good  may 
come,  it  is  impossible  to  see  how  an  aggregation  or  society  of 
men,  acting  under  and  through  the  forms  of  self-constituted 
government,  can  rightfully  grant  to  any  of  their  number  licenses 
or  indulgences  for  the  doing  of  evil.  It  was  not  in  the  days  of  its 
greatest  usefulness  and  purity,  that  a  church,  which  has  exer- 
cised a  controlling  influence  over  more  than  half  the  nations 
of  Christendom,  shocked  and  disgusted  the  moral  sensibilities 
of  mankind  by  the  sale  of  its  indulgences,  but  it  was  when  it 
had  reached  the  lowest  depths  of  venality  and  depravity. 

But  it  is  said  by  the  petitioners  that  the  existing  statute  can- 
not be  enforced,  and  that,  therefore,  it  should  be  repealed  or 
modified.  Upon  this  subject  the  testimony  of  one  of  their  own 
witnesses,  most  competent  to  speak  upon  this  point,  ought  to  be 
conclusive  against  them.  Judge  Sanger,  district-attorney  for 
Suffolk  County,  and  who  as  judge  and  prosecuting  officer,  has 
long  been  familiar  with  the  administration  of  the  criminal  law 
in  that  county  as  well  as  in  other  counties  of  the  State,  testified 
before  the  Committee  that  this  law  can  be  enforced  in  Boston — 
that  it  is  only  a  question  of  time.  And  certainly  if  it  can  be 
executed  in  Boston  there  will  be  no  serious  difficulty  in  its 
enforcement  in  every  other  part  of  the  Commonwealth.  Hon. 
B.  B.  Gillette,  for  many  years  district-attorney  for  the  western 
district,  called  as  a  witness  by  the  petitioners,  testified  that, 
with  the  right  of  challenge  given  to  the  government  as  it  is  now 


1867.]  HOUSE—No.  415.  45 

possessed  by  the  defendant,  this  law  can  be  enforced  with  all 
other  penal  statutes.  And  the  testimony  of  the  present  efficient 
State  constable  and  that  of  his  predecessor  in  office,  reinforced 
by  what  is  known  of  their  vigorous  and  effectual  enforcement 
of  this  as  well  as  other  penal  statutes,  demonstrate  the  ground- 
lessness of  this  objection  that  the  law  cannot  be  executed. 

The  following  is  the  statement  of  Colonel  William  S.  King, 
the  first  constable  of  the  Commonwealth,  upon  this  subject,  and 
the  testimony  is  all  the  more  emphatic  and  valuable  when  it  is 
known  that  Colonel  King  was  not  a  particular  friend  of  the 
prohibitory  law.  He  says  : — 

"  When  I  entered  upon  the  duties  of  the  office  (State  constable,)  to 
whbh,  on  my  return  from  military  service,  I  found  myself  appointed,  I 
am  free  to  confess  that  I  did  not  feel  hopeful  of  success  in  enforcing 
these  laws.  Without  having  given  the  subject  much  consideration,  I 
had  unconsciously  been  influenced  by  the  common  cry,  '  Oh,  it  is  use- 
less to  attempt  to  enforce  these  laws  in  opposition  to  public  sentiment.* 
And  what  is  called  the  prohibitory  law  I  declined  even  to  attempt  to 
enforce.  I  had  not  been  long  in  office,  however,  before  I  became  con- 
vinced that  the  sufficient  reason  why  the  law  had  not  been  enforced  was 
that  no  real  effort  had  ever  been  made  in  that  direction.  And  I  now 
distinctly  state  that,  in  my  judgment,  by  earnest,  persevering,  hopeful 
effort,  with  the  requisite  authority  and  means,  not  only  this  law,  but  any 
and  every  other  law  upon  the  statute  book  of  Massachusetts,  can  be 
thoroughly  enforced ;  and  if  I  had  found  it  convenient  to  retain  my 
position,  with  the  means  even  then  under  my  control,  and  with  a  final 
decision  upon  the  legal  questions  in  dispute,  I  would  have  staked  my 
reputation  with  my  fellow-citizens  upon  the  result." 

All  the  legal  questions  referred  to  by  Colonel  King  have  been 
finally  decided  in  favor  of  the  law  by  the  highest  judicial  tri- 
bunals of  the  State  and  of  the  United  States.  The  State 
constabulary  has  been  largely  increased  during  the  present 
session  of  the  legislature,  and  all  that  is  now  wanting  to  com- 
plete the  work  of  enforcing  this,  like  every  other  penal  statute, 
upon  all  known  offenders,  is  an  honest  and  faithful  co-operation 
by  the  local  police  of  towns  and  cities  with  the  State  police,  as 
they  are  required  to  do  by  existing  statutes. 

To  admit  for  a  single  moment  that  the  State  cannot  execute 
its  laws  would  be  a  confession  of  weakness  unworthy  of  a  great 


46  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

and  powerful  Commonweal th,  and  would  be  a  pusillanimous 
surrender  of  the  authority  of  government  to  the  power  of  the 
vicious  and  lawless.  And  to  strike  a  law  from  the  statute  book 
on  such  a  plea  would  deprive  the  remaining  statutes  of  all  dig- 
nity and  of  all  moral  force  ;  they  would  remain  only  as  a 
monument  of  the  weakness  of  government  and  the  indulgence 
of  the  criminal  classes,  who  should  forbear  to  demand  their 
repeal. 

It  now  remains  for  us  to  notice  more  particularly  than  we 
have  heretofore  done,  though  briefly,  the  two  principal  grounds 
on  which  the  petitioners  base  their  prayer  for  a  license  law. 

First.  They  claim  that  alcoholic  beverages  are  a  good  and 
not  an  evil — that  they  are  food,  or  act  as  a  substitute  for  food — 
that  when  taken  in  moderation  they  sustain  and  nourish  instead 
of  impairing  and  destroying  the  animal  economy.  This,  as  one 
of  the  many  debated  and  debatable  questions  of  science  and  medi- 
cine, we  do  not  propose  here  to  discuss,  but  shall  merely  submit 
the  latest,  and  as  we  believe,  the  most  reliable  conclusions 
of  science  upon  this  subject,  as  expressed  by  the  most  eminent 
chemists  and  physicians. 

1.  That  alcohol  is  not  food ;  being  simply  a  stimulant  of  the 
nervous  system,  its  use  is  hurtful  to  the  body  of  a  healthy  man. 

2.  That  if  its  use  be  of  service,  it  is  so  only  to  man  in  an 
abnormal  condition. 

3.  That  ordinary  social  indulgence  in  alcoholic  drinks,  for 
society's   sake,  is  medically  speaking,  a  very  unphysiological 
and  prejudicial  proceeding. 

4.  That  this  use  of  fermented  and  distilled  liquors  is  often 
noxious ;   it  should  always  be  restrained  ;   it  should  never  be 
tolerated  except  in  exceptional  cases. 

It  is  not  denied  that  conclusions  differing  from  the  foregoing 
have  been  announced  by  other  eminent  scientific  and  medical 
authorities.  But  suppose  we  should  admit,  which  however  we 
are  not  prepared  to  do,  that  these  conflicting  authorities  in 
science  and  medicine- as  to  the  dietetic  character  and  value  of 
alcoholic  beverages,  are  so  equally  balanced  that  we  are  unable 
to  determine  on  which  side  the  truth  lies,  we  are  then  thrown 
back  upon  the  common  and  safer  and  more  reliable  sources  of 
information  to  guide  us  in  the  discharge  of  our  practical  duties 
as  legislators.  And  here  we  find  the  evidence  overwhelming, 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  47 

and  all  leading  inevitably  to  the  same 'conclusions.  So  that  if 
the  dietetic  value  of  these  liquors  were  'much  greater  than  it 
is  claimed  to  be,  still,  in  view  of  the  "  appalling  statistics  of 
intemperance,"  it  would  be  the  duty  of  government  to  interfere 
and  inhibit  a  traffic,  which,  unless  all  history  is  false,  results 
invariably  in  consequences  so  disastrous  to  the  peace,  order, 
morals,  health  and  highest  prosperity  of  society. 

Second.  Another  ground  on  which  it  is  claimed  the  prayer  of 
the  petitioners  should  be  granted,  is,  that  a  license  law  would 
regulate  and  diminish  the  sale  and  use  of  alcoholic  liquors. 
And  this  view  of  the  subject  is  urged  with  so  much  earnestness 
and  zeal,  the  legislature  might,1  perhaps,  be  induced  to  try  the 
experiment  if  it  had  not  been  tried  a  thousand  times  and  for 
hundreds  of  years  before,  and  invariably  failed  to  accomplish 
the  promised  results. 

License  laws  to  regulate  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors 
were  in  force  in  the  Province  and  Commonwealth  of  Massachu- , 
setts  for  more  than  two  hundred  years  after  the  first  settlement. 
And  yet  the  history  of  that  long  period  shows  that  the  evil  of 
intemperance  continued  and  increased.  New  and  more  strin- 
gent and,  perhaps,  more  judicious  license  laws  were  passed  from 
time  to  time  until  the  year  1787,  when  a  new  law  was  passed  by 
the  then  recently  formed  State  government.  This  law  of  1787, 
with  some  amendments  which  did  not  change  radically  its  gen- 
eral character,  remained  a  law  of  the  State  until  the  year  1832. 
The  frightful  increase  of  intemperance  during  the  quarter  of  a 
century  which  elapsed  between  the  passage  of  the  license  law  of 
1787  and  the  organization  of  the  first  society  in  the  State  for 
the  express  purpose  of  promoting  temperance,  would  seem  to 
furnish  pretty  conclusive  evidence  that  the  legalizing  of  the  cause 
of  intemperance  is  not  the  best  or  most  effectual  means  of  sup. 
pressing  the  e.vil.  In  the  year  1816,  a  law  was  passed,  for  the 
first  time  in  this  State,  and  limited  at  first  in  operation  to  the 
city  of  Boston  but  afterwards  extended  to  all  parts  of  the  Com- 
monwealth. This  law  authorized  the  granting  of  licenses  to 
common  victuallers,  with  the  right  to  sell  intoxicating  liquors, 
as  the  petitioners  ask  that  it  may  now  be  done.  And  contem- 
porary history  will  satisfy  any  honest  student  that  that  law  was 
one  of  the  most  fruitful  sources  of  crime  and  vice  that  ever 
existed  in  this  Commonwealth. 


48  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

By  an  Act  of  the  year  1832,  county  commissioners,  as  it  was 
then  understood,  were* required  to  license  innholders  and  others 
to  a  certain  extent,  with  the  right  to  sell  intoxicating  liquors. 
And  yet  the  rising  flood  of  intemperance  was  not  stayed.  By  a 
law  of  1837,  the  county  commissioners  were  at  liberty  to  grant 
or  withhold  licenses  as  they  might  judge  the  public  good 
required.  And  in  six  counties  in  the  Commonwealth,  they 
did  refuse,  for  several  years,  to  grant  any  licenses  for  the  sale 
of  intoxicating  liquors  as  beverages.  From  that  time,  an 
opportunity  was  offered  to  the  people  of  contrasting  the  benefits 
and  evils  of  the  two  opposing  theories  of  license  and  prohibition 
in  adjoining  counties ;  and,  in  the  course  of  a  few  years,  and  in 
the  progress  of  events  and  the  discussions  and  investigations 
which  were  carried  on  during  these  years  touching  these  sub- 
jects, the  whole  Commonwealth  came  at  length  in  1852  to 
adopt  the  prohibitory  theory,  and  have  adhered  to  it  steadily 
from  that  time  to  the  present.  And  we  are  not  left  to  be 
guided  by  the  light  of  our  own  experience  alone  upon  this  sub- 
ject ;  for,  if  we  extend  our  observations  to  other  and  neighbor- 
ing States,  and  to  other  countries,  we  shall  find  the  history  of 
license  laws,  authorizing  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors,  to 
be  uniform,  and  shall  be  taught  their  utter  inefficiency  as  refor- 
matory measures,  or  as  restraining  the  unlawful  traffic,  Hon. 
Linus  Child,  one  of  the  counsel  who  appeared  before  the  Com- 
mittee for  the  petitioners,  in  the  year  1838,  being  then  a 
member  of  the  legislature,  and,  as  a  member  of  one  of  the 
committees,  discussing  the  effect  of  a  license  law  uses  this  sig- 
nificant language :  "  It  may  well  be  doubted,  whether  intem- 
perance would  have  increased  with  more  rapid  strides,  if  no 
legislative  regulation  of  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  had 
ever  been  made.  " 

Nothing  has  occurred  during  the  last  thirty  years,  in  the 
history  or  experience  of  States  or  communities  where  license  laws 
have  prevailed,  to  lead  us  to  revise  the  judgment  here  expressed. 
And  we  may  add,  that  the  evidence  adduced  by  the  petitioners 
utterly  failed  to  prove  that  temperance  is  to  be  promoted,  intem- 
perance repressed,  or  the  unlawful  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors 
prevented,  by  throwing  over  the  traffic,  in  the  hands  of  a  few 
favored  licensees,  the  direct  sanction  and  protection  of  govern- 
ment. Moreover,  it  is  difficult  to  understand  how  the  practice 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  49 

of  dram-drinking  is  mado  less  pernicious  by  making  the  sale  -of 
intoxicating  liquors  for  that  purpose  lawful.  But,  why  should 
we  discuss  these  questions  further  which  have  been  so  long  and 
so  thoroughly  settled  in  the  minds  of  the  people  of  this  Com- 
monwealth ?  For  we  quite  agree  with  the  committee  of  the 
Massachusetts  legislature  of  the  year  eighteen  hundred  and 
sixty-one,  in  that  part  of  their  report  wherein  they  say :  "  It 
may  be  taken  to  be  the  solemnly  declared  judgment  of  the 
people  of  the  Commonwealth,  that  the  principle  of  licensing 
the  traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks  as  a  beverage,  and  thus  giving 
legal  sanction  to  that  which  is  regarded  in  itself  an  evil,  is  no 
longer  admissible  in  morals  or  in  legislation.  The  license  sys- 
tem, formerly  in  operation,  was  the  source  of  insoluble  embar- 
rassments among  casuists,  legislators,  courts  and  juries.  A 
return  to  it  would  re-open  an  agitation  long  since  happily  put 
to  rest ;  it  would  invade  the  moral  convictions  of  great  numbers 
of  our  people  ;  it  would  revive  the  opprobrium  which  public  sen- 
timent always  adjudges  to  a  monopoly  established  by  law,  ren- 
dered all  the  more  intense  by  the  offensive  nature  of  the  business 
thus  supported  by  the  sanction  and  protection  of  the  legislature." 

And  the  sound  and  forcible  reasoning  of  a  distinguished 
writer  upon  this  subject  has  lost  none  of  its  force  or  value 
by  the  lapse  of  more  than  thirty  years  since  he  declared  that 
"  What  ought  not  to  be  used  as  a  beverage,  ought  not  to  be 
sold  as  such.  What  the  good  of  the  community  requires  us  to 
•expel,  no  man  has  a  moral  right  to  supply.  That  intemper- 
ance is  dreadfully  multiplied  by  the  number  of  licensed  shops 
for  the  retailing  of  spirits,  we  all  know.  And  not  only  should 
the  vending  of  spirits  in  these  impure  haunts  be  discouraged ; 
the  vending  of  them  by  respectable  men  should  be  discouraged 
as  a  great  public  evil." 

Under  the  lead  of  such  teachers  of  moral  and  social  duty, 
the  great  debate,  which  commenced  in  this  State  more  than 
fifty  years  ago,  concerning  the  use  and  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors,  went  on,  accompanied  by  the  most  thorough  investga- 
tion  of  facts,  until  it  resulted  in  the  enactment  of  the  law  now 
standing  upon  our  statute  book.  And  believing  as  we  do,  that 
neither  public  welfare  nor  private  good,  neither  public  rights 
nor  private  rights,  require  or  could  be  promoted  by  any  essential 


50  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

modification  of  that  law  at  the  present  time,  we  respectfully 
report  that  the  petitioners  have  leave  to  withdraw. 

The  petition  of  the  College  of  Pharmacy  asks  for  such  change 
in  the  law  as  will  enable  them  to  conduct  their  business  in  a 
legal  manner.  If  druggists  could  not,  under  the  present  law, 
transact  the  legitimate  and  appropriate  business  of  their  profes- 
sion or  trade,  including  the  sale  of  spirituous  liquors  for  medic- 
inal purposes,  we  should  think  it  most  reasonable  that  the  law 
should  be  amended  so  as  to  enable  them  to  do  that  business  in 
"  a  legal  manner."  These  petitioners  do  not  ask  to  be  permitted 
to  sell  the  articles  named  for  any  other  purposes  than  those 
now  authorized  by  law. 

What  then  is  there  to  hinder  them  from  transacting  their 
business  in  a  legal  manner  now  ?  As  has  already  been  shown 
in  this  Report,  every  respectable  apothecary  in  the  Common- 
wealth can,  under  the  existing  law,  be  appointed  an  agent  for 
the  sale  of  spirituous  or  intoxicating  liquors  for  all  the  pur- 
poses for  which  the  petitioners  say  they  desire  to  sell.  And  it 
is  within  the  knowledge  of  the  undersigned,  that  many  of  the 
apothecaries  in  the  State,  of  the  highest  standing  in  their  profes- 
sion, are  acting  as  such  agents,  and  have  done  so  for  many 
years.  They  are  subjected  to  some  additional  trouble  and 
labor  in  keeping  a  separate  set  of  books  in  which  they  keep  -the 
account  of  their  purchase  and  sale  of  these  liquors.  The  pro- 
visions of  law  under  which  apothecaries  may  receive  an  appoint- 
ment as  such  agents,  are  perfectly  well  known  to  the  petitioners  ;' 
and  the  reason  they  gave  for  not  asking  for  such  appointment, 
or  being  willing  to  accept  it,  was  the  inconvenience  of  conduct- 
ing the  business  in  the  manner  required  by  law ;  and,  rather 
than  accommodate  themselves  to  the  requirements  of  law 
because  it  was  inconvenient,  some  of  their  witnesses  who  were 
apothecaries,  substantially  admitted  that  they  had  carried  on 
their  business  in  violation  of  law.  And  perhaps  it  is  not  too 
much  to  say,  that  a  large  proportion  of  the  apothecaries  in 
Boston,  as  well  as  in  other  parts  of  the  Commonwealth,  who 
are  not  duly  appointed  agents  for  the  sale  of  liquors,  are  now 
conducting  that  part  of  their  business  in  defiance  of  law.  There 
are,  undoubtedly,  many  apothecaries  to  whom  it  would  be  per- 
fectly safe  and  proper  to  intrust  the  dispensing  of  liquors  for 
medicinal  and  other  lawful  purposes,  just  as  they  now  dispense 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  51 

other  medicines.  But,  while  this  is  true,  it  is  equally  well 
known  that  there  is  a  very  large  number  of  persons  engaged 
as  druggists  and  apothecaries  who,  under  cover  of  that  business, 
are  dealing  extensively  in  the  liquor  traffic  in  utter  disregard 
of  law. 

Colonel  King,  in  his  report  as  constable  of  the  Commonwealth 
in  1866,  speaking  of  the  apothecaries  of  Boston,  says  :  "  There 
are  one  hundred  and  seven  apothecary  shops  open  every  Sun- 
day, employing  two  hundred  and  forty-nine  persons.  At  many 
of  these  establishments  liquor  is  freely  sold,  and  Sunday  is 
their  best  day"  And  he  adds,  that  it  is  well  understood  that 
these  establishments  are  dram-shops  in  disguise. 

And  yet  the  keepers  of  these  establishments  are  apothecaries, 
and  a  law  authorizing  apothecaries  to  sell  intoxicating  liquors 
would  be,  so  far  as  this  class  of  apothecaries  is  regarded,  the 
worst  and  most  dangerous  form  of  a  license  law.  And  no  fact 
is  better  known  to  the  police  and  prosecuting  officers  through- 
out the  Commonwealth,  than  that  many  of  the  apothecaries' 
shops  in  all  parts  of  the  State  are  of  the  character  described  by 
Colonel  King.  And  while  it  is  true  that  there  are  very  many 
druggists  and  apothecaries  of  the  highest  reputation  as  men  of 
business  and  general  integrity,  to  whom  the  sale  of  liquors  for 
all  lawful  purposes  could  be  intrusted  with  perfect  safety,  yet 
such  a  law  as  the  petitioners  ask  for,  would  open  wide 
the  door  of  license  to  all  unworthy  members  of  their  pro- 
fession. And  since  under  the  provisions  of  existing  laws,  they 
can  by  securing  appointments  as  agents,  conduct  their  busi- 
ness successfully  and  in  strict  conformity  with  law,  we  cannot 
now  join  in  a  recommendation  of  any  change  in  the  law.  It 
has  been  sometimes  said  that  the  liquors  furnished  by  the  State 
Commissioner,  of  whom  all  town  and  city  agents  are  required 
to  make  purchases,  are  not  always  suitable  for  medicinal  pur- 
poses ;  and  that  that  is  a  reason  why  apothecaries  might  not  be 
willing  to  accept  an  agency.  Whatever  grounds  there  may  have 
heretofore  been  for  such  complaints,  it  is  believed  that  since  the 
present  Commissioner  has  been  in  office,  no  just  cause  for  such 
complaints  has  existed  and  does  not  now  exist.  And  the  Com- 
missioner, Hon.  Mr.  Baker,  testified  before  the  Committee  that 
he  had  applications  from  several  apothecaries  in  the  city  of 
Boston  for  appointment  as  agents.  But  by  the  law  as  it  now 


52  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

stands,  he  cannot  appoint  more  than  five  such  agents  in  the  city 
of  Boston.  The  section  of  the  law  giving  the  Commissioner  this 
power,  reads  as  follows :  "  He  (the  Commissioner)  shall 
appoint  in  the  city  of  Boston  as  many  agents,  not  exceeding 
five,  as  he  thinks  the  interests  of  the  citizens  require."  If  the 
mayor  and  aldermen  would  do  their  duty  imder  the  law  in 
regard  to  appointing  these  agents,  there  would  be  no  necessity 
of  enlarging  the  powers  of  the  Commissioner  in  the  appoint- 
ment of  agents.  But  it  is  in  evidence  that  the  mayor  and 
aldermen  of  the  city  of  Boston  have,  from  year  to  year,  almost, 
if  not  wholly,  neglected  this  part  of  their  duty ;  notwithstanding 
the  provisions  of  the  law  upon  this  subject  are  explicit  and  per- 
emptory. Section  17,  of  chapter  86,  General  Statutes,  declares, 
that  "  the  mayor  and  aldermen  or  selectmen  of  every  city  and 
town,  on  the  first  Monday  of  May  annually,  or  as  soon  after  as 
convenient,  shall  appoint  for  one  year,  unless  sooner  removed 
by  the  board  appointing  them,  one  or  more  suitable  persons  as 
agents  of  such  place  to  purchase  and  sell,  at  some  convenient 
places  therein,  spirituous  or  intoxicating  liquors,  to  be  used  in 
the  arts,"  &c. 

Under  this  section  of  the  law  the  mayor  and  aldermen  may 
appoint  one  or  one  hundred  agents  for  the  purposes  named  in 
the  statute.  And  it  is  plain  that  there  is  nothing  to  hinder 
them  from  appointing  every  respectable  apothecary  in  this  city 
as  such  agents,  if  they  adjudge  the  public  interests  and  con- 
venience of  the  citizens  require  so  many.  But  in  view  of  the 
fact  that  the  city  authorities  of  Boston  have  not  heretofore  dis- 
charged their  duty,  and  may  not  hereafter,  under  the  section  of 
the  law  cited  above,  we  recommend  the  passage  of  the  accom- 
panying Bill. 

CALEB  SWAN, 

Of  the  Senate. 

P.  EMORY  ALDRICH, 
EDWARD  FLINN, 
JOHN  McCLELLAN, 

Of  the  House. 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  53 

LI  U  U  A  It  V 

N'  I  V  KIJSITV-   OF 

( ALIFOKxlA. 
of 


In  the  Year  One  Thousand  Eight  Hundred  and  Sixty- 
Seven. 


AN  ACT 

To  amend  section  Ninth  of  chapter  Eighty-Six  of  the 
General  Statutes. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representa- 
tives, in  General  Court  assembled,  and  ly  the  authority  of 
the  same,  as  follows : — 

1  The  commissioner  named  in  the  first  section  of 

2  chapter  eighty-six  of  the  General  Statutes,  shall  have 

3  power  to  appoint  in  the   city  of  Boston,  under  the 

4  direction  of  the  governor  and  council,  as  many  agents, 

5  not   exceeding   fifty,   for   the   purchase  and   sale   of 

6  spirituous  and  intoxicating  liquors  for  the  purposes 

7  set  forth  in  the  seventeenth  section  of  said  chapter, 

8  as  he  may  think  the  interests  of  the  citizens  require, 

9  who    shall  have   the   same   powers  and   be  subject 

10  to  the  same  obligations  as  agents  appointed  by  the 

11  mayor  and  aldermen  of  cities,  under  the  provisions 

12  of  section  seventeenth   of  the  eighty-sixth   chapter 

13  aforesaid. 


54  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 


DISSENTING    KEPOET 

BY  MR.  FAY  OF  THE  SENATE. 


HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES,  May  14, 1867. 

The  undersigned, a' member  of  the  "Joint  Committee  on  the 
subject  of  a  License  Law,"  differing  with  his  associates,  both 
of  the  majority  and  minority,  ventures  to  submit  a  separate 
Report. 

He  commenced  the  consideration  of  the  Petitions  for,  and 
Remonstrances  against,  tlie  passage  of  a  license  law,  entirely 
uncommitted.  He  had  never  been  an  advocate  of  the  "  pro- 
hibitory law ;"  and  by  education  and  predilection  has  been 
inclined  to  trust  rather  to  moral  than  to  legal  influences  to 
forward  the  cause  of  temperance. 

Not  having  seen  either  of  the  other  Reports,  (though 
informed  of  their  conclusions,)  he  may  use  illustrations  or 
quotations  identical  with  theirs,  which  lie  would  otherwise 
have  avoided,  but  he  will  endeavor  to  present  the  impressions 
left  on  his  mind  by  the  evidence  submitted,  and  to  add  some 
thoughts  of  an  earlier  growth. 

Two  CLASSES. 

He  proposes  to  consider  the  petitioners  and  remonstrants  as 
representing  two  classes  of  temperance  men,  both  seeking  what 
they  believe  to  be,  on  the  whole,  for  the  good  of  society.  The 
fact  that  there  are  many  whose  interests  or  appetites  lead  them 
to  support  one  side  of  this  question,  and  whose  judgment  upon 
a  matter  of  expediency  may  be  thus  affected,  should  not 
induce  us  to  stigmatize  all  who  do  not  favor  prohibition,  as 
"  liquor-sellers  "  or  "  wine-bibbers." 

PETITIONERS. 

The  petitioners  -ask  for  such  a  law  as  is  "  demanded  by  the 
best  interests  of  the  State,  and  will  promote  the  cause  of  temper- 
ance." And  the  undersigned  has  known  too  long  and  too  well 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  55 

the  personal  influence  and  personal  character  of  the  petitioner 
first  named,  to  believe  that  he  would  ask  any  legislation  that 
did  not  seem  to  him  best  calculated  to  accomplish  the  objects 
named  in  the  petition  ;  and  when  he  testified  that  he  had 
been  "  pledged  to  total  abstinence  ever  since  he  was  old  enough 
to  know  what  it  meant,"  and  had  "  never  touched  liquor  as  a 
beverage,  and  never  allowed  its  use  in  his  family,"  the  previous 
estimate  of  his  character  was  confirmed. 

And  there  are  many  other  petitioners  whose  habits  and 
example  equally  entitle  them  to  be  classed  as  friends  of  tem- 
perance. But  we  must  admit,  and  the  petitioners  will  confess, 
that  many  of  their  number,  who  are  controlled  neither  by 
interest  nor  appetite,  have  not  yet  so  far  established  an  inde- 
pendence of  the  "  customs  of  society,"  as  not  to  allow  its  use  in 
their  families  as  a  beverage.  And  yet  they  are  temperate  and 
virtuous  men,  and  would  not  consciously  mislead  one  of  their 
fellows,  nor  throw  their  influence  on  the  wrong  side. 

Hon.  Mr.  Child,  in  his  opening  argument  for  the  petitioners, 
says :  "If  the  prohibitory  law  be  the  best,  and  will  promote 
temperance  the  best,  God  grant,  so  far  as  I  am  concerned,  that 
it  be  adopted.  .  .  .  Only  give  me  the  means  that  shall 
best  make  men  temperate,  moral,  sober,  religious." 

And  again  he  says :  "The  question  is, — which  system  of  legis- 
lation (so  far  as  it  depends  on  legislation,)  is  best  adapted  to 
check,  restrain  and  control  the  sale  of  liquor,  and  which  is  best 
fitted  to  promote  the  cause  of  temperance  and  best  calculated 
to  stay  the  ravages  of  intemperance  ?  " 

And  again :  "  The  great  thing  to  be  accomplished,  if  you 
would  make  men  temperate  and  sober,  is  to  induce  a  man  intel- 
ligently, honestly,  in  view  of  truth,  in  view  of  fact,  in  view  of 
argument,  to  give  up  the  use  of  it." 

Therefore  it  seems  unfair,  and  it  is  surely  unwise,  to  repre- 
sent that  none  are  friends  of  temperance  who  do  not  support 
the  present  law. 

REMONSTRANTS. 

But,  at  the  same  time,  it  should  be  said  that  we  find  in  the 
ranks  of  the  remonstrants  those  who  are  known  and  recognized 
as  especially  the  leaders  in  public  temperance  movements — 
men  who  have  spoken  most,  worked  most,  paid  most,  for  the 


56  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

promotion  of  the  cause.  They  arc  earnest,  self-sacrificing, 
conscientious,  devoted  men  and  women,  and  while  we  cannot 
approve  the  denunciatory  spirit  which  is  sometimes  apparent, 
and  while  some  of  them  are  "  extremists,"  and  seem  to  be 
intemperate  in  their  temperance,  yet  we  must  excuse  much  in 
view  of  their  faithfulness  to  their  own  idea,  and  the  magnitude 
of  the  evil  which  urges  them  on.  We  must  not  forget  how,  a 
few  years  ago,  in  the  slavery  agitation,  we  estimated  men, 
leaders  in  that  cause,  and  haw  we  estimate  them  now.  In 
getting  our  educatidn  on  that  subject,  our  school  had  a  long 
term.  We  graduated  after  a  four  years'  course  of  war,  and  find 
ourselves  side  by  side  with  the  men  we  formerly  denounced  as 
"  fanatics." 

Therefore,  while  we  may  not  agree  with  extremists  now,  we 
may,  at  least,  be  lenient  in  our  judgment  of  them.  They  seem 
to  be  a  necessary  class  in  all  reforms. 

The  charge  that  some  of  the  remonstrants  vote  one  way  and 
practice  another  is  no  valid  argument  against  the  law  they 
advocate.  As  long  as  men  are  ambitious  and  votes  will  gratify 
their  ambition,  we  must  not  expect  the  professions  and  practices 
of  all  politicians  to  be  consistent. 

DIFFICULTIES. 

That  the  subject  is  "  surrounded  by  difficulties"  all  will 
admit,  for  this  attempt  to  restrain  men  by  law  is  "  fighting 
against  an  infirmity  of  our  nature" — against  the  assumed  right 
to  eat,  drink  and  wear  what  we  please,  and  the  desire  to  do, 
especially,  what  is  forbidden.  In  this  respect  we  are  all 
children. 

But  in  determining  our  action  we  need  not  consider  the  mo- 
tives of  the  men  who  support  either  side  of  the  question.  The 
possible  or  probable  practices  under  the  law  should  alone  claim 
the  attention  of  legislators.  Nor  is  it  needful  to  determine 
whether  or  not  it  is  a  sin  to  sell  or  drink  intoxicating  liquors. 
There  are  sins  quite  prevalent  in  Massachusetts  that  we  do  not 
legislate  against,  and  there  are  acts  which  are  not  sins  that  we 
do  legislate  against. 

Nor  need  we  discuss  what  were  the  practices  in  Christ's  time, 
or  for  what  purpose  he  turned  water  into  wine  at  the  wedding ; 
or  whether  the  wine  of  those  days  was  intoxicating,  or  whether 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  57 

Timothy  was  a  willing  or  an  unwilling  listener  to  the  suggestion 
for  his  "  stomach's  sake.'5  We  legislate  for  our  time  and  for 
our  people,  and  upon  an  article  that  we  know  to  be  intoxicat- 
ing ;  and  we  need  not  quarrel  as  to  the  original  meaning  of  the 
word  translated  "  wine." 

EVILS. 

The  evils  attendant  upon  the  sale  and  use  of  intoxicating 
liquors  are  admitted  on  all  hands.  The  most  earnest  advocates 
of  a  license  law,  those  who  prudently  use,  and  those  who  abuse 
the  practice,  will  agree  upon  this.  To  quote  again  from  Mr. 
Child :  u  The  basis  of  all  legislation  upon  this  subject  rests 
upon  the  assumption  that  the  common  use  of  intoxicating 
liquors  by  .the  great  masses  of  the  people,  will  necessarily  be 
followed  by  intemperance,  and  by  all  the  evils  of  intemperance." 
If  this  were  not  conceded,  the  records  of  our  courts,  our  pris- 
ons, and  of  pauperism  would  attest  it.  Wretched  families  and 
homes  cry  out  to  prove  it ;  and  the  waste  of  money  and  the 
waste  of  labor  growing  out 'of  it  is  almost  beyond  conception. 

All  these  evils  demand  some  effort,  by  every  legislator  and 
by  every  man,  practically  to  lessen  and  control  them. 

SUPPRESSION  IMPOSSIBLE. 

But  the  undersigned  starts  upon  the  assumption,  that  it  is 
impossible  entirely  to  prevent  by  law  the  sale,  use  and  abuse  of 
spirituous  liquors  as  a  beverage.  Ex-Governor  Washburn  has 
said,  "  It  is  idle  to  think  of  enforcing  it  (the  prohibitory  law,) 
in  our  large  cities  and  towns,  by  means  of  the  few  civil  officers 
known  to  the  law.  Against  the  passions,  the  appetites  and  the 
cupidity  of  the  thousands  who  will  be  found  active,  busy  and 
united  in  opposing  it,  these  officers  will  be  powerless." 

Under  the  present  regime,  this  appears  to  be  an  extreme 
statement,  but  it  recognizes  a  truth  and  a  difficulty. 

Says  Mr.  Child:  "No  system  of  legislation,  whether  it  be  a 
license  law  or  a  prohibitory  law,  will  check  absolutely  the  prog- 
ress of  intemperance  by  force  of  its  own  provisions,  by  its  own 
inherent  efficacy." 

More  or  less  dissipation  must  be  accepted  as  a  sad  necessity ; 
but  we  must  not  be  wrecked  upon  the  rock  of  impossibility. 
While  it  is  apparent  that  the  prohibitory  law  has  not  suppressed 


58  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

the  illegal  sale  of  spirituous  liquors  in  large  communities, 
it  did  not  appear  in  evidence  that  a  license  law  in  this  or 
other  States  had  ever  been  executed  against  the  unlicensed,  or 
that  intemperance  lessened  under  it.  If  it  were  desirable  that 
the  principle  of  a  license  law  should  be  recognized,  it  has  not 
yet  appeared  that  one  could  be  framed  which  would  not  be 
open  to  the  same  liability  to  -abuse  as  the  present  law.  There 
are  many  laws  on  the  statute  book  not  fully  executed.  They 
are  enacted  with  such  an  expectation,  and  they  are  neither 
repealed  nor  amended. 

EXPERIMENT. 

All  law  is  experiment,  and  the  experiment  of  prohibition 
evidently  commends  itself  to-day  to  a  majority  of  the  people  of 
the  State,  a  part  of  whom  have  an  earnest  faith  in  the  principle, 
and  a  part  consent  to  a  faithful  trial,  in  view  of  the  existing 
evil.  They  contend,  and  it  is  fair  to  admit,  that  the  experi- 
ment has  not  yet  been  fairly  tried.  They  feel  that  the  consti- 
tutional questions  which  have  been  carried  to  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  have  hindered  the  execution  of  the 
law.  "  A  new  law  becomes  practically  inoperative  until  the 
legal  principles  are  settled. "  Besides,  the  war  has  intervened. 
Now  these  hindrances  are  removed,  and  having  the  State  con- 
stabulary, with  an  honored  paternity  and  an  efficient  chief, 
with  the  machinery  of  the  law  perfected,  there  is  a  "  fair  field," 
and  its  friends  will  doubtless  ask  "  no  favor,"  if,  in  due  time, 
the  experiment  shall  have  failed.  Nor  will  the  advocates  of  a 
license  law  persist  in  their  opposition  to  the  principle  of  prohi- 
bition, if  the  result  shall  prove  that  the  evil  is  checked. 

It  is  contended,  and  it  is  true,  that  a  law  should  be  fully  sus- 
tained by  public  sentiment.  But,  in  this  matter,  at  the  present 
moment,  it  does  not  seem  possible.  Here  are  two  large  parties, 
with  a  radical  difference  as  to  the  proper  principle  of  legislation. 
There  seems  to  be  no  middle  ground,  and  a  united  public  sen- 
timent will  come  only  after  thorough  trial  of  one  or  the  other 
of  these  laws.  In  the  meantime  we  must  not  expect  either, 
party  cordially  to  support  the  policy  of  the  other,  even  as  an 
experiment. 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  59 

As  A  MEDICINE. 

Although  authorities  differ  as  to  the  value  or  necessity  of 
alcoholic  liquors  as  medicine,  most  people  believe  that  they  are 
more  or  less  useful.  It  is  true  that  it  is  difficult  to  determine 
where  their  use  as  a  medicine  ends  and  as  a  beverage  begins, 
as  our  appetites  and  our  palates  influence  our  sanitary  necessi- 
ties. But  while  it  is  so  generally  used  for  medical  purposes,  it 
ought  to  be  accessible  at  the  places  where  other  medicines  are 
usually  sold.  The  present  law  does  not  permit  druggists  and 
apothecaries,  unless  appointed  town  agents,  to  sell  these  articles. 
And  the  larger  cities  and  towns  would  hardly  appoint  as  many 
agents  as  there  are  apothecaries.  To  meet  this  need,  and  in 
answer  to  the  petition  of  the  Massachusetts  College  of  Phar- 
macy, the  undersigned  recommends  the  passage  of  the  accom- 
panying Bill,  "  To  authorize  druggists  and  apothecaries  to  sell 
spirituous  liquors. " 

u  STATE  AGENCY." 

Much  discussion  has  taken  place  in  regard  to  the  character 
of  the  "  State  Agency,"  and  the  quality  of  the  articles  it  fur- 
nishes. That  the  childhood  of  the  agency  did  not  give  promise 
of  an  exemplary  manhood,  it  is  true  ;  but  in  the  later  days,  no 
evidence  exists  of  "  need  of  conversion."  The  present  incum- 
bent is  admitted  on  all  hands,  to  be  above  reproach,  a  man 
who  strives  to  avoid  all  the  evils  of  the  system  not  inherent. 
Without  discussing  the  necessity  or  expediency  of  the  system 
of  a  State  Agency,  it  seems  to  the  undersigned  that  while  the 
Commonwealth  proposes  to  continue  it,  the  Commissioner 
should  be  placed  on  the  same  ground  as  other  State  agents  ; 
that  is,  first,  he  should  be  furnished  with  the  means  to  conduct 
his  business ;  and  second,  his  salary  should  be  a  fixed  one,  not  as 
now  dependent  upon  a  commission.  The  principle  is  a  bad  one, 
when  applied  to  public  officers,  and  ought  not  to  be  encouraged 
by  the  State.  The  same  remarks  will  apply  to  the  State  Assayer, 
and  his  compensation  should  be  definite. 

The  undersigned  recommends  the  passage  of  the  accompa- 
nying Bill,  "  Concerning  the  State  Liquor  Commissioner  and 
State  Assayer." 


60  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

IN  BRIEF. 

By  a  hearing  so  protracted  as  this  has  been  before  your  Com- 
mittee, and  by  the  witnesses,  unequalled  in  numbers  and  ability, 
there  have  been  many  points  suggested,  deserving  comment. 
But  passing  most  of  these,  it  may  be  briefly  said  : — 

1.  While  "  physiological  chemistry  is  in  its  infancy,  (Prof. 
White,)   "a  terra  incognita?'  (Prof.  Clarke,)  we  may  well 
waive  all  discussion  of  the  disputed  question  of  "  alimentation," 
and  "  disintegration  of  tissues,5'  regretting,  if  to  any  one  it  has 
seemed  needful  to  prove  alcohol  essential  to  hinder  "  decay." 

2.  From    the   customs   in  the   grape-growing   districts    of 
Europe,  if  there  be  less  intemperance,  the  wine  must  be  more 
pure,  (Prof.  Agassiz,)  the  people  more  prudent,  or  the  climate 
more  propitious.     When  the  vineyards  of  California,  Ohio  and 
Missouri,  shall  furnish  pure  wine  enough  to  slake  the  public 
thirst,  we   may  adapt  our  efforts,  legal  and  moral,  to  that 
possible  condition. 

3.  We  need  not  be  too  sensitive  of  "  personal  rights "  in 
great  emergencies.     We  often  sacrifice  them  for  the  general 
good.     All  laws  limit  the  liberty  of  the  good  citizen  needlessly, 
if  he  alone  were  concerned. 

4.  It  would  be  creditable  and  profitable  to  Massachusetts,  if 
her  real  estate  owners  would  follow  the  example  of  Alpheus 
Hardy,  (Appendix,  page  203^)  and  "  refuse  to  let  any  building 
for  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors"  as  a  beverage. 

No  PRESENT  CHANGE  OF  POLICY. 

Failing  to  find  sufficient  evidence  of  the  probable  enforce- 
ment of  a  license  law,  and  respecting  the  entire  confidence  of 
so  many  citizens  in  the  prohibitory  law,  fairly  tried,  the  under- 
signed cannot  recommend  any  radical  change  in  the  policy  of 
the  State  at  the  present  time,  and  therefore  consents  to  the 
report,  "  leave  to  withdraw,"  on  the  petitions  of  Alpheus  Hardy 
and  others. 

MORAL  EFFORT. 

"  Law  is  not  reformatory,"  but  may  be  preventive  till  other 
measures  can  operate.  The  child  is  commanded  till  he  is  old 
enough  to  be  reasoned  with. 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  61 

We  may  not  successfully  erect  "  legal  fences  against  the 
devil,"  but  we  may  invite  the  good  angels  in  to  pre-occupy  the 
ground.  Legislation  may  be  confined  to  the  "  traffic," — the 
efforts  of  the  pulpit  and  the  individual  to  the  "  use."  During 
all  this  discussion  and  experiment  of  law,  moral  effort  should 
not  be  lessened.  The  advocates  of  whatever  law,  or  for  no 
law,  are  not  exempt  from  this  demand. 

Hence,  what  follows — 

A  DEVIATION. 

Pending  the  trial  of  the  legal  experiment,  and  until  public 
sentiment  shall  have  fully  declared  itself,  the  undersigned  car- 
ries out  a  previous  suggestion,  and  ventures  upon  a  departure 
from  the  strict  line  of  legislative  reports,  and  strays  into  a 
field  outside  of  legislative  action. 

His  excuse  must  be  found  in  the  ardent  desire  which  every 
man  ought  to  have  to  make  some  contribution  in  this  direction 
to  the  public  good. 

It  is  the  enunciation  of  a  long  cherished  sentiment,  and  he 
is  willing  to  subject  himself  to  criticism  for  embracing  the 
present  opportunity  of  expressing  it. 

ORDER  OF  GOOD  EXEMPLARS. 

Waiving  for  the  moment  all  discussion  of  the  expediency  of 
any  present  or  proposed  law,  the  undersigned  ventures  to  indi- 
cate what  has  always  seemed  to  him  essential  to  final  success 
in  checking  an  evil  which  all  recognize  and  deplore. 

He  has  long  felt  that,  outside  of  all  temperance  movements, 
apart  from  orders  of  Good  Templars,  Sons  of  Temperance, 
Cold  Water  Armies,  Total  Abstinence  Societies  and  State 
Alliances,  there  is  an  individual  responsibility  resting  upon  us 
all.  Every,  man  is  an  exemplar  to  some  other  man  or  woman 
or  child,  and  every  one  is  responsible  for  some  kind  of  moral 
effort  to  lessen  the  unnecessary  use  of  intoxicating  liquors. 

This  may  be  attained  without  the  sacrifice  of  any  individual 
right  or  privilege,  except  that  of  yielding  to  and  following  a 
prevalent  but  not  essential  form  of  hospitality.  Without  pro- 
fessing or  consenting  to  be  a  total  abstinent,  and  without  setting 
up  any  claim  to  superior  virtue,  one  may  waive  this  privilege. 
While  he  retains  all  his  right  of  self-control,  it  asks  a  man,  for 


62  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 

others'  good,  simply  to  surrender  a  social  custom,  and  to  become 
a  self-elected  member  of  an  order  which  has  neither  grip  nor 
pass-word,  lodge-room  nor  regalia — the  order  of  Good  Exem- 
plars. 

Hospitality  is  said  to  be  "  as  universal  as  the  face  of  man," 
but  there  need  be  no  arbitrary  mode  of  expressing  it.  And 
the  undersigned  has  always  felt  that  the  desired  reform,  to  be 
vital  and  effective,  must  begin  with  the  customs  and  example 
of  those,  who,  by  virtue  of  their  position  and  character,  control 
the  fountain-head  of  public  social  influence. 

But  while  the  men  who  endow  our  colleges,  found  our  scien- 
tific schools  and  encourage'  our  scientific  men ;  who  fill  our 
Galleries  of  Art  and  Public  Libraries,  and  sustain  our  noble 
charities — while  the  overseers,  trustees  or  officers  of  these  insti- 
tutions— while  the  men  who  have  been  and  are  in  public 
positions,  and  whom  the  people  delight  to  honor — while  the 
representative  men  of  our  Merchants,  Manufacturers  and  Corn 
Exchanges — while  those  who  can  be  independent  in  their  action 
without  being  suspected  of  inability  or  parsimony  or  ignorance 
of  custom — while  these  contend  that  true  hospitality  demands 
that  they  set  wine  before  their  guests,  or  accept  it  at  the  table  of 
others — just  so  long  will  those  less  prominent  and  influential, 
follow,  as  far  as  they  are  able,  the  customs  of  these  more 
favored  classes. 

If  the  danger  were  only  to  these,  we  might  fear  it  less  or  not 
at  all ;  but  those  who  imitate  the  manners  of  the  leaders  in 
social  circles  may  fail  to  imitate  their  wise  discretion.  We 
claim  to  know  our  own  strength  ;  it  is  not  safe  to  presume  upon 
that  of  others.  Wine  is  a  convenient  expedient  in  hospitality, 
we  know,  but  custom  only  makes  it  essential ;  and  our  customs, 
as  our  fashions,  are  banished  or  established  by  the  classes  we 
have  named. 

Forty  years  ago,  the  men  of  that  time  tell  us,  whether  at 
wedding,  birth  or  funeral,  or  at  the  call  of  the  pastor  or  the 
friend,  the  inevitable  decanter  was  set  out ;  and  to  the  host  or 
hostess  there  was  as  much  mortification,  if  it  were  not  full,  as 
if  they  had  not  food  enough  for  a  generous  meal.  There  is  no 
such  iron  law  now,  and  some  one  had  to.  begin  the  breaking 
away  from  that  universal  custom. 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  63 

The  undersigned  believes  that,  with  rare  exceptions,  it  is  not 
the  natural  love  of  wine  or  spirits  which  tempts  men  to  drink, 
but  that  the  habit  grows  out  of  social  pleasures  ;  and  he  cannot 
resist  the  impression  that  the  responsibility  for  some  of  the 
excesses  in  society  is  shared  by  those  who  endorse  this  example 
df  "  vinous  hospitality ; "  an  example  which  others,  weaker  than 
they,  cannot  safely  follow.  He  firmly  believes  that  if  a  few  of 
the  leading,  representative  men  and  women,  of  each  community 
in  Massachusetts,  without  combination,  association  or  confer- 
ence, but  each  on  his  or  her  individual  responsibility,  would 
dare  to  be  independent,  and  be  willing  to  make  such  a  personal 
sacrifice  as  has  been  suggested,  it  would  be  more  productive  of 
good  results  in  coming  time  than  all  enactments,  past  or  future. 

The  men  and  women  of  this  class  would  not  fear  to  act 
because  there  are  extremists  on  either  side  ;  nor  lest  they  might 
be  counted  as  reformers  or  enthusiasts  ;  for  without  the  press- 
ure of  a,ny  law  or  obligation,  their  action  would  be  quiet,  silent 
even,  simply  adding  one  more  to  the  individual  sacrifices  they 
are  constantly  making  to  the  general  good. 

Such  an  act  would  require  no  loss  of  liberty,  and  would 
result  in  little  need  of  law.  The  aroma  of  this  spirit  of  self- 
sacrifice,  and  this  personal  influence,  more  grateful  and  more 
enduring  than  the  "  boquet "  of  any  wine,  would  penetrate 
where  statute  law  can  never  enter,  and  would  surely  bear  a 
double  blessing. 

CONCLUSION. 

With  an  apology  if  his.  deviation  from  the  usual  line  of  legis- 
lative reports  seems  unbecoming,  and  with  a  hope  that  by  public 
law  or  private  example  temperance  may  yet  prevail,  the  under- 
signed commends  the  thoughts  he  has  offered,  and  the  Bills  he 
presents,  to  the  favor  of  the  legislature. 

FRANK  B.  FAY, 

Of  the  Senate. 


64  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 


of 


In  the  Year  One  Thousand  Eight. Hundred  and  Sixty- 
Seven. 


AN  ACT 

To  authorize  Druggists  and  Apothecaries  to  sell  Spirituous 

Liquors. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representa- 
tives^ in  General  Court  assembled,  and  by  the  authority  of 
the  same,  as  follows  : — 

1  SECT.  1.     Druggists    and'   apothecaries   may    sell 

2  alcohol,  spirits  and  wines  for  medicinal  purposes  only  : 

3  provided,  that  they  shall  keep  a  book  in  which  they 

4  shall  enter  the  date  and  quantity  of  every  sale,  the 

5  name  and  residence  of  the  purchaser,  and  if  exported, 

6  the  place  to  which  exported  and  the  name  of  the  con- 

7  signee;  which  book  shall  at  all  times  be  open  to  the 

8  inspection  of  the  mayor  and  aldermen  or  selectmen, 

9  or  of  any  state  constable. 

10  If  a  druggist  or  apothecary,  or  any  clerk  or  agent 

11  of  a  druggist  or  apothecary  is  convicted  of  an  illegal 

12  sale,  he  shall  be  subject  to  the  penalties  prescribed 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.                                65 

13  in  section  thirty  of  chapter  eighty-six  of  the  General 

14  Statutes. 

1  SECT.  2.     Section  twenty-six  of  chapter  eighty-six 

2  of  the  General  Statutes  is  hereby  repealed. 

1  SECT.   3.      This    act    shall    take  effect  upon  its 

2  passage. 


66  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 


of 


In  the  Year  One  Thousand  Eight  Hundred  and  Sixty- 
Seven. 


AN  ACT 

Concerning  the  State  Liquor  Commissioner,  and  State 

Assayer. 

Be  it  enacted  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representa- 
tives, in  General  Court  assembled,  and  by  the  authority  of 
the  same>  as  follows : — 

1  SECT.  1.     From  and  after  the    first   day  of  July 

2  next,  the  state  liquor  commissioner  shall  receive  as 

3  compensation  for  his  services,  in  lieu  of  the  commis- 

4  sion  provided  for  in  .section  three  of  chapter  eighty- 

5  six  of   General  Statutes,  and  chapter  one   hundred 

6  and  thirty-six,  acts  of  eighteen  hundred  and  sixty-one, 

7  the  sum  of  four  thousand  dollars  per  annum,  pay- 

8  able  from  the  treasury  of  the  Commonwealth. 

1  SECT.  2.     To   enable   said   commissioner  to  carry 

2  out  the  purposes  of  his  office  and  complete  the  pur- 

3  chases   authorized  by   said    chapter  eighty-six,   the 

4  treasurer  and  receiver-general  is  hereby  authorized  to 

5  furnish  to  said  commissioner,  from  time  to  time,  such 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  67 

6  sums  of  money  as   he   may  require :   provided,  the 

7  whole  amount   of  such  advances  shall   not   exceed 

8  fifty   thousand   dollars.      Such   payments    shall    be 

9  approved  by  the  governor  and  council,  and  be  subject 
10  to  such  regulations  as  may  be  established  by  them. 

1  SECT.  3.     Said  commissioner  shall,  on  the  first  day 

2  of  each  month,  make  return  to  the  auditor  of  all  his 

3  purchases  and  sales,  and  of  the  expenses  of  his  office, 

4  for  the  month  next  preceding ;    and  shall  annually 

5  make  a  report  of  the  total  amount  of  such  purchases,. 

6  sales  and  expenses,  with  the   amount   of  stock  on 

7  hand  and  its  value. 

1  SECT.  4.     He  shall  at  all  times   keep  his  stock 

2  fully  insured  for  the  benefit  of  the  Commonwealth. 

1  SECT.  5.     The  state  assayer  employed  under  section 

2  three    of    chapter   eighty-six   of    General    Statutes, 

3  shall  receive  from  the  first  of  July  next,  in  lieu  of  the 

4  commission  named  in  said  section,  such  fixed  salary 

5  for  his  services,  and  such  an  amount  for  the  expenses 

6  of  his  office,  as  the  governor  and  council  may  deter- 

7  mine. 

1  SECT.  6.     The   treasurer   and;  receiver-general   is 

2  hereby  authorized   to   borrow  on    the   credit  of  the 

3  Commonwealth  such  sums  as  may  from  time  to  time 

4  be  necessary  to  carry  out  the  conditions  of  this  act* 

1  SECT.  7.     All  acts  and  parts  of  acts  inconsistent 

2  with  this  act  are  hereby  repealed* 


68  LICENSE  LAW.  [May, 


DISSENTING     REPORT 

BY  MR.  SHERMAN  OF  THE  HOUSE. 


HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES,  May  14, 1867. 

In  most  of  the  smaller  towns  of  the  State,  the  present  law,  or 
the  license  law  in  connection  therewith,  will  suppress  the  sale  of 
liquor.  The  question,  in  fact,  relates  only  to  the  cities  and 
large  towns,  where  the  present  law  has  as  yet  had  no  real 
success. 

It  is  claimed  that  hereafter,  the  law,  fortified  by  the  United 
States  court  decisions,  and  its  execution  made  possible  by  the 
increase  of  the  State  constabulary  force,  and  the  change  of  the 
jury  law,  will  be  effectual  everywhere  in  the  State. 

If  a  license  law  is  passed  this  year,  it  will  ever  afterwards  be 
claimed  that  it  was  passed  just  when  the  prohibitory  law  was 
about  to  become  effectual,  and  because  it  was  becoming  effec- 
tual. It  is  due  to  the  friends  of  the  present  law  that  it  shall 
have  the  trial  of  another  year. 

If  the  experience  of  another  year  should  prove  the  present 
law  a  success,  no  friend  of  total  abstinence  can,  with  reason, 
ask  for  a  license  law ;  and  then  it  will  remain  to  be  seen 
whether  public  sentiment  will  sustain  prohibition  enforced,  as 
well  as  prohibition  in  theory  only. 

If,  however,  it  is  not  successful,  and  successful  not  merely  by 
fitful  efforts,  attended  with  no  permanent  effect,  not  by  merely 
closing  particular  places  of  sale,  but  by  stopping  the  sale,  and 
the  drinking ;  if  it  shall  be  found  still  to  work  the  manifest 
injustice  of  seizing  the  liquors  of  certain  individuals  and  closing 
up  certain  places  of  sale,  while  other  places  of  larger  traffic  are 
not  interfered  with,  but  with  special  favoritism  are  allowed  to 
continue  to  sell,  with  great  increase  of  business — then  the 
present  law  ought  to  be  regarded  a  failure,  and  a  license  law, 


1867.]  HOUSE— No.  415.  69 

like  that  proposed  in  the  Majority  Report,  meet  with  general 
favor. 

Next  year  it  cannot  be  claimed  that  the  prohibitory  law  has 
not  had  a  full  and  fair  trial,  with  all  the  adjuncts  needed  for  its 
efficacy.  If  it  fails  of  success,  the  license  law  will,  as  I  think, 
receive  the  support  of  a  large  part  of  the  friends  of  temperance 
and  of  consistency  in  legislation. 

I  recommend  that  the  petitions  be  referred  to  the  next 
legislature. 

E.  F.  SHERMAN. 


TESTIMONY 


BY 


JAY     READ     PEMBER,     AND     ASSISTANTS, 


APPENDIX. 


FIRST    DAY. 

TUESDAY,  Feb.  19, 1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  10  o'clock,  A.  M.  There  appeared,  on  behalf  of 
the  petitioners,  Hon.  JOHN  A.  ANDREW  and  Hon.  LINUS  CHILD,  and  on 
behalf  of  the  remonstrants,  W.  B.  SPOONER,  Esq.,  and  Rev.  A.  A.  MINER. 
The  Chairman  read  the  order  adopted  by  the  Committee  regarding  the  intro- 
duction of  testimony. 

The  opening  statement  on  behalf  of  the  petitioners  was  submitted  by  Hon. 
Linus  Child. 

TESTIMONY  OF  Ex-Gov.  EMORY  WASHBURN. 

Question.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Mr.  Washburn,  will  you  be  good  enough 
to  state  your  means  of  judging  as  to  the  operation  of  the  two  systems  of  law 
relative  to  the  sale  of  liquor — the  old  license  system,  and  the  prohibitory 
system  now  in  operation  ?  Give  your  means  of  ascertaining  as  a  judge  of 
the  courts,  as  a  lawyer,  etc.  You  can  go  on  without  questions,  if  you  please. 

Answer.  I  received  a  notice  from  my  friend,  Mr.  Morissey,  last  night,  to 
attend  here  this  morning,  but  I  did  not  know  for  what  purpose  I  should  be 
called  ;  and  there  being  a  hearing  upon  the  subject  of  a  license  law,  I  sup- 
posed some  questions  in  reference  to  that  might  be  asked  me,  and  I  took  the 
liberty  to  jot  down  some  instances  which  have  fallen  within  my  own  observa- 
tion during  my  former  experience ;  and,  without  reading  them,  I  simply  ask 
the  liberty  to  refer  to  some  data  upon  which  any  opinions  that  I  may  be 
called  upon  to  express  are  founded.  If  the  question  is  simply  a  question  of 
fact,  of  course  my  remarks  must  be  exceedingly  limited.  If  I  am  at  liberty 
to  state  my  own  observation  from  some  experience  that  I  have  had  in  the 
matter  of  the  temperance  movement  at  an  earlier  period,  I  should  ask  per- 
mission to  say  that  I  engaged  in  that  as  early  as  1828,  and  from  1828  to  1852, 
I  suppose  that  probably  I  was  as  active,  I  do  not  say  as  efficient,  but  prob- 
ably as  active,  as  any  man.  I  know  scarcely  a  town  in  the  county  of  Wor- 
cester where  I  have  not  had  occasion  to  go  more  than  once  while  engaged  in 
speaking  upon  this  subject.  I  certainly  must  have  paid  out  in  horse-hire 
several  hundreds  of  dollars,  in  addition  to  the  time  I  have  spent  besides.  I 
always  held  myself  at  the  service  of  any  one  who  wished  to  oppose  the  grant- 
ing of  licenses ;  and  I  suppose  I  must  have  resisted  more  than  one  hundred  in 
the  county,  and  generally  with  success ;  and  I  never,  from  the  beginning  of 
my  labors  to  the  present  time,  have  received  the  first  cent  for  compensation* 
I  never  allowed  myself  to  receive  compensation.  I  began  with  a  pretty 
earnest  and  confident  zeal  and  belief  that  intemperance  could  be  suppressed 
by  stopping  the  sale.  It  was  my  conviction  that  it  was  unnecessary,  and  that 
it  could  be  stopped ;  and  to  that  point,  of  course,  I  labored,  so  far  as  my 


APPENDIX.  3 

ability  went.  But  I  soon  found  that  unless  we  could  bring  public  sentiment 
up  to  a  proper  tone, — educate  it,  if  I  may  so  speak,  to  a  proper  tone  of  feeling, 
— that  we  could  not  succeed  in  suppressing  the  sale.  It  was  so  universal  at 
that  time,  (and  my  friends  here  will  remember  the  condition  of  things,  as  far 
as  temperance  was  concerned,  at  that  time,)  that  I  suppose .  there  was  not  a 
family  that  did  not  use  it.  I  suppose  that  you  could  not  go  to  a  merry- 
making, or  to  a  grave,  serious  meeting,  that  you  did  not  find  liquor  freely 
offered  and  used.  There  was  in  the  town  in  which  I  lived,  I  think,  some 
five  or  six  persons  licensed  as  retailers,  and  as  many  inn-keepers,  who  sold  it. 
That  was  in  the  town  of  Leicester.  We  went  to  work,  those  of  us  who  took 
part  in  it,  with  the  view  of  changing  the  moral  opinion  of  the  community,  and 
to  satisfy  the  people  that  it  was  not  only  unnecessary,  but  that  it  was  a  moral 
and  physical  evil,  and  one  which  the  community  were  called  upon,  out  of 
regard  to  their  own  best  interests,  to  suppress.  I  believe  that  the  gentlemen 
engaged  in  that  cause  had  succeeded,  to  a  very  considerable  extent,  in  that 
and  other  counties,  in  satisfying  the  public  mind.  The  chief  methods  of 
operation  were  through  the  public  press,  through  public  meetings,  through 
addresses  to  the  public,  by  pamphlets  and  by  conventions.  I  do  not  know 
how  many  conventions  I  had  the  honor  of  being  present  at.  Certainly  I  was 
secretary  of  the  first  one  ever  held  in  Worcester  County,  and  I  had  the  honor 
of  being  the  vice-president  of  the  first  young  men's  temperance  association 
held  in  that  county,  and  that,  you  must  consider,  was  some  time  ago  ;  and  I 
believe  there  were  few  that  were  more  eager  and  earnest  debaters  of  that 
matter  than  I  endeavored  to  be  in  these  conventions.  The  result,  Mr.  Chair- 
man, was,  that  the  public  feeling  and  the  public  sentiment  grew  in  the  com- 
munity ;  and  it  was  so  strong  afterwards  at  Worcester  that  there  was  scarcely 
a  man  among  the  leading  men  there  that  did  not  come  into  our  conventions 
and  join  with  us  and  take  part  in  the  measures  which  we  adopted  for  the 
suppression  of  intemperance.  We  had  a  serious  contest,  I  remember,  for 
instance,  on  the  subject  of  granting  licenses ;  and  it  was  carried  so  far  that 
our  tavern-keepers  shut  up  their  hotels,  with  the  exception  of  one  who  kept  a 
temperance  house.  We  carried  it  through  there  and  sustained  it.  Public 
sentiment  had  grown,  and  the  public  began  to  feel,  as  it  seemed  to  me,  as  if  it 
was  their  cause,  and  not  the  cause  of  any  set  of  officers ;  that  it  was  the  cause 
of  the  public,  and  that  they  were  to  take  care  of  it ;  and  it  was  to  this  that 
we  had  appealed.  Things  went  on  in  that  way,  Mr.  Chairman,  until  1838. 
In  1838  I  had  the  honor  of  being  a  member  of  the  House  of  Representatives, 
where  the  question  of  the  sale  of  liquors  came  up,  and  we  carried  through, 
with  a  very  decided  vote,  what  was  called  the  "  fifteen-gallon  law."  It  was 
in  consequence  of  what  was  supposed  to  be  then  the  public  sentiment .  by  the 
large  number  of  petitioners  for  such  a  law.  The  number  I  do  not  recollect, 
but  I  think  it  was  some  twenty  thousand.  It  was  a  very  large  number  at  any 
rate.  We  supposed  that  public  sentiment  was  to  sustain  such  a  law  as  that. 
That  law  prohibited  the  sale  of  liquor  in  less  quantities  than  fifteen  gallons, 
and  there  were  measures  taken  after  that  had  been  passed  to  carry  out  that 
law.  I  remember  of  taking  a  very  active  part  the  year  following  in  getting 
up,  in  connection  with  my  friends,  a  public  celebration  on  the  4th  of  July, 
and  a  celebration  the  purpose  of  which  was  to  sustain  the  public  sentiment  in 


4  APPENDIX. 

upholding  that  "  fifteen-gallon  law,"  as  it  was  called.  Affairs  went  on  in  that 
way  for  a  year  or  two  after  that  law  was  reported.  It  was  ascertained  that 
public  sentiment  was  not  up  to  sustaining  that  law.  Instead  of  being  backed 
up,  as  we  supposed  it  was  going  to  be,  it  failed  almost  entirely,  and  it  was 
repealed.  I  may  be  permitted  perhaps  to  make  the  remark  here,  without 
meaning  to  violate  the  suggestion  of  the  chairman  in  relation  to  the  matter 
of  testimony,  that  the  difficulty  that  we  found  (certainly  that  I  found  myselt 
in  my  own  experience,)  was  this:  that  wo  undertook  to  make  the  sale  and  the 
use  of  liquor  criminal,  to  punish  it  as  criminal,  and  to  attach  a  penalty  to  it. 
Most  things  of  a  properly  criminal  character  can  be  suppressed,  that  is  to  say, 
can  be  prohibited  altogether ;  for  instance,  larceny,  under  all  circumstances, 
is  criminal,  and  so  a  great  variety  of  these  acts  are  crimes  under  all  circum- 
stances. But  we  were  never  able  to  devise  a  law  which  would  be  sustained 
by  the  public  sentiment,  except  one  for  regulation.  We  recognized  in  every 
Act  (and  as  is  recognized  in  the  present  Act  I  believe)  the  right  under  some 
circumstances  to  sell  liquor.  I  believe  no  Act  has  ever  gone  so  far  (if  it  has, 
it  has  escaped  my  knowledge,)  as  to  undertake  to  stop  the  sale  of  liquor  alto- 
gether, as  you  do  other  crimes.  You  have  got  to  regulate  it ;  but  the  diffi- 
culty we  had  to  encounter  was  to  make  a  public  sentiment  that  it  was  under 
certain  circumstances  a  crime ;  that  what  was  under  certain  circumstances 
right  and  necessary  in  the  eye  of  the  law  and  in  the  eye  of  the  community* 
was,  under  other  circumstances,  so  far  penal  as  to  be  a  crime.  That  was  one 
great  trouble  that  we  had  to  encounter.  That  was  the  difficulty  we  had  in 
carrying  out  the  "  fifteen-gallon  law."  Complaints  were  made  that  if  it  was 
right  to  buy  sixteen  gallons  at  one  time,  it  was  right  to  buy  it  at  four  different 
times.  That  is  one  difficulty  we  had  to  encounter  in  making  an  entirely  pro- 
hibitory law.  We  found  that  the  sale,  as  I  said  before,  was  to  be  regulated, 
instead  of  being  absolutely  and  unqualifiedly  prohibited  and  restrained. 
Now  another  thing,  Mr.  Chairman,  which  we  found,  (I  say  we  because  it 
was  common  conversation  among  those  of  us  who  were  actively  engaged  at 
that  time,  and  it  was  what  I  encountered  everywhere  when  I  made  addresses 
and  when  I  went  into  the  different  towns,)  was  the  great  difficulty  which  we 
had  to  encounter  in  this  fact :  that  every  people  in  the  world  has  had  and 
probably  always  will  have  artificial  stimulants — something  that  supplies 
excitement,  (whether  it  is  called  for  by  nature  I  do  not  know :  I  speak  of  it 
merely  as  a  universal  fact,)  and  I  believe  every  nation  has  the  means  of 
supplying  artificial  stimulant,  under  circumstances  which  produce  not  an 
intoxicating  but  a  stimulating  effect ;  as,  for  instance,  tea,  coffee,  wine,  or  the 
grosser  forms  of  alcoholic  drinks.  We  found  that  we  had  got  to  encounter 
that  everywhere.  When  I  went  to  appeal  to  a  man  to  leave  off  his  drinking, 
where  he  was  ruining  himself  and  family,  he  would  say,  "  My  neighbor  uses 
it ;  why  do  not  you  go  to  him.  It  is  no  worse  for  me  than  it  is  for  you  to 
use  your  tea  and  coffee."  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  the  argument  was  a 
good  one.  I  merely  speak  of  the  facts  as  presented  to  us,  and  it  seemed 
hopeless  to  attempt  to  suppress  and  defeat  the  sale  of  liquor  entirely.  We 
had,  therefore,  this  to  encounter :  that  in  the  case  of  the  arts  and  in  the  case 
of  medicine,  alcohol,  in  some  form,  was  regarded  as  necessary  and  useful, 
and  that,  in  the  matter  of  pleasurable  excitement,  (if  I  may  use  that  term, 


APPENDIX.  5 

and  I  use  it  as  mildly  as  I  can,)  every  class  of  people  and  every  nation  had 
had  something  that  answered  for  that  purpose,  and  which  had  grown  by 
usage  to  be  indulged  in  in  the  grosser  forms  of  drinking.  Now,  sir,  our 
zeal,  (I  say  our — I  would  not  hold  my  friends  responsible  for  that  zeal — I 
will  say  my  zeal,)  carried  some  of  us  at  least  to  attempt  to  confine  and  stop 
that.  Cider  was  forbidden ;  beer  was  forbidden ;  everything  of  a  stimulating 
character  was  forbidden.  And  they  have  had  their  due  degree  of  severity 
of  remark  whenever  I  have  had  an  opportunity  to  talk  about  them.  And  I 
wish  now  to  say  that  I  do  not  come  here  to-day  to  do  that  which  shall  throw 
anything  in  the  way  of  the  progress  of  the  temperance  movement.  I  would 
let  my  right  hand  be  cut  off  this  moment  rather  than  to  throw  any  obstacle  in 
the  way  of  it.  And  if  this  law  should  be  carried  out,  (though  I  have  not  indi- 
vidually co-operated  with  my  friends  in  this  movement,)  I  would  go  the 
whole  length  of  the  matter.  I  do  not  want  any  indulgence  or  anything  in 
the  way  of  favor  in  that  respect;  Liquor  I  do  not  use.  With  perhaps  the 
exception  that  on  one  occasion,  when  through  accident  I  came  near  sustain- 
ing a  very  serious  injury,  when  the  doctor  prescribed  for  me  the  use  of  some 
brandy,  I  do  not  think  I  have  used  a  glass  of  liquor  for  the  last  thirty  years, 
and  I  have  never  changed  my  views  in  this  matter ;  and  the  question  that  I 
am  now  dealing  with  is  a  question  of  policy.  If  I  am  wrong  in  policy,  I  am 
sorry  for  it.  I  have  been  asked  by  my  friend,  Mr.  Child,  to  state  what  my 
views  are,  and  that  is  a  point  upon  which  I  wish  to  say  a  word.  Now,  then, 
I  became  satisfied  that,  so  far  as  concerns  this  matter,  the  policy  to  be 
adopted  was  one  of  regulation.  I  do  not  see  how  you  could  in  the  nature 
of  things  make  it  a  policy  of  prohibition. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Don't  you  call  the  present  law  one  of  regu- 
lation ? 

A.  I  do,  sir;  but  I  think  there  is  a  great  objection  to  it;  and  before  I  get 
through  I  will  state  what  I  mean  by  regulation.  I  start  with  the  principle, 
that  it  is  a  question  of  policy  as  to  how  to  treat  the  subject  legally.  That  is 
the  whole  question,  as  it  seems  to  me.  I  am  not  going  to  argue  the  question, 
but  that  is  the  view  to  which  I  have  come,  that  it  is  impossible,  wholly,  to 
suppress  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors.  Now,  gentlemen,  as  I  said  before, 
the  only  way  in  which  this  can  be  done  as  it  seems  to  me,  is  by  means  of  a 
public  sentiment,  and  a  power  of  public  opinion.  I  do  not  believe,  from  a 
pretty  long  course  of  observation  and  experience,  that  you  can  make  a  law 
which  is  decidedly  against  the  public  sentiment,  and  carry  it  out,  any  more 
than  you  could  make  a  black  man  white,  or  a  white  man  black.  You  cannot 
do  it.  And  there  are  statutes  upon  our  statute-books  to-dav  that  are  violated 
every  day.  No  man  thinks  of  complying  with  them,  and  they  are  mere  dead 
letters.  Therefore,  it  is  my  belief  that  you  cannot  carry  them  out  without 
having  a  public  sentiment  to  sustain  you.  My  friend  did  not  allude,  so  far  as 
I  heard,  in  giving  the  history  and  course  of  policy  here,  to  the  measure  which 
was  attempted  in  1840  to  bring  temperance  into  the  matter  of  politics. 

Mr.  Hildreth,  either  himself  or  through  his  instrumentality,  got  up  a 
convention  (the  largest,  by  all  means,  that  I  have  ever  attended  in  Boston,) 
for  the  purpose  of  organizing  a  temperance  political  party.  I  had  the  honor 
of  being  a  member  of  that  convention,  and  I  had  the  honor  of  being  one 


6  APPENDIX. 

among  seventy  of  that  convention  (among  whom  were  Mr.  Hoar  and  several 
other  distinguished  gentlemen,)  who  battled  that  point  all  day ;  but  we  were 
voted  down  by  a  very  large  majority.  There  was  a  sentiment  in  that  con- 
vention in  favor  of  getting  up  a  temperance  party.  We  entered  our  solemn 
protest  against  it,  and  for  some  reason  or  other  the  project  was  never  carried 
out.  My  reason  was  this :  that  the  moment  you  bring  it  into  a  party,  the 
desire  for  office  is  created,  and  the  very  man  that  clamors  the  loudest  is 
generally  likely  to  be  the  man  that  does  the  least  for  the  cause  of  temperance; 
and  it  is  a  fact  in  my  own  experience,  that  the  men  who  have  scoffed  at  me 
and  hooted  at  me  and  my  friends  in  the  advocacy  of  this  matter,  were 
the  men  who,  in  the  end,  stepped  forward  as  patrons  and  leaders  in  the 
temperance  movement.  The  result  of  the  movement  was,  that  there  was  no 
further  action  taken;  but  as  an  evidence  that  our  effort  was  not  entirely 
without  effect,  I  may  mention  here,  that  I  had  the  honor  to  be  placed  at  the 
head  of  seventy  others,  against  whom  a  most  bitter  and  vindictive  pamphlet 
was  published,  and  that  this  number  of  gentlemen  was  composed  of  tempe- 
rance men  who  were  opposed  to  creating  a  temperance  party,  to  be  composed 
of  temperance  men.  Now,  I  come  down  to  the  matter  of  law  after  these 
preliminaries.  The  law  of  1832,  as  you  are  aware,  (if  I  recollect  it  aright, 
for  I  have  not  looked  at  my  law-books  for  a  great  while  ;  my  friend,  the  chair- 
man, has  looked  over  his  law-books  more  recently  as  to  that  matter,)  contem- 
plated the  granting  of  licenses  by  commissioners,  upon  application  of  selectmen 
of  the  various  towns ;  so  that  no  man  could  get  a  license  unless  he  had  the 
approbation  of  the  selectmen  and  also  the  ^approbation  of  the  county  commis- 
sioners. The  election  of  the  county  commissioners  was  based  upon  the  popular 
vote,  and  of  course  the  selectmen  were  chosen  by  the  town.  Therefore, 
whether  men  should  be  licensed  or  not,  or  whether  you  should  have  a  licensed 
store  in  any  village  or  town,  depended  upon  the  popular  vote  of  that  region. 
That,  sir,  was  the  means  by  which  we  then  went  to  work  with  all  the  earnest- 
ness in  our  power  to  counteract  the  effect  of  the  free  and  general  sale  and 
use  of  liquors.  I  might  mention  to  you  that  I  had  occasion  a  great  many 
times  to  resist  the  licensing  of  public  houses  and  of  retail  dealers. 

The  question  became  a  question  of  discussion  in  every  town,  in  every  town 
meeting,  and  in  every  village  circle,  and  the  result  was,  that  we  got  a  fair 
discussion  upon  the  question  of  temperance,  and  there  were  no  two  sides 
about  it;  and  whenever  the  question  has  been  brought  fairly  before  the 
people,  this  has  always  been  the  result ;  and  if  we  did  not  succeed  in  this  or 
that  town  in  one  instance,  we  were  sure  that  it  would  be  made  right  the  next 
year,  by  getting  a  proper  kind  of  selectmen.  In  the  county  of  Worcester 
we  got  so  that  we  chose  temperance  men  for  commissioners,  and  they  would 
not  grant  licenses  oftentimes,  even  if  they  got  the  approbation  of  the  select- 
men ;  and  I  have  some  reports  here,  in  which  some  statements  are  made 
bearing  upon  this  point,  and  which  would  be  entirely  according  to  my  own 
recollection.  It  is  stated  that,  in  1830,  in  the  county  of  Worcester,  there 
were  211  licensed  retailers,  and  160  inn-holders;  making  in  all,  371.  In 
1840,  there  were  69  licensed  retailers,  and  105  inn-holders  having  licenses. 
Now,  it  was  about  that  time  that  efforts  were  particularly  directed  to  this 
matter,  and  they  continued  up  to  1852.  In  1850,  the  retailers  licensed  were 


APPENDIX,  7 

36 ;  and  it  was  a  fact  within  my  own  knowledge,  that,  in  some  of  the  towns, 
the  very  towns  which  I  mentioned,  where  before  1828  there  was  such  a  num- 
ber of  licensed  retailers  and  as  many  inn-holders,  I  do  not  believe  —  and  it 
is  a  belief  founded  upon  very  thorough  inquiry  —  that  there  was  a  place 
where  you  could  buy  a  glass  of  liquor  for  any  consideration,  in  the  way  of 
sales.  It  was  in  many  towns  practically  and  actually  expelled,  and  the  thing 
was  going  on  with  entire  success  in  town  after  town  in  that  county ;  and  I  am 
speaking  of  that  county  now  more  particularly.  We  had  been  banishing  it 
by  public  sentiment,  by  the  action  of  the  public  mind,  until  it  was  expelled 
from  a  great  many  of  the  towns ;  and  in  the  town  of  Worcester  it  was  carried 
so  far,  that  the  hotel-keepers,  thinking  to  produce  a  counter  current,  took 
down  their  signs ;  and  those  of  us  who  had  houses  took  in  strangers  the  best 
way  we  could ;  but  the  whole  sentiment  of  the  people  was  in  favor  of  this 
measure. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Did  the  hotel-keepers  bring  about  a  granting  of 
licenses  in  that  way ;  did  they  get  any  legal  authority  to  sell  ? 

A.  I  do  not  remember  how  that  was  ;  I  could  not  speak  confidently  as  to 
the  result  of  their  action.  I  remember  the  fact  very  well,  for  it  was  an  event 
not  to  be  forgotten.  I  am  alluding  to  this,  Mr.  Chairman,  simply  to  show  the 
course  of  public  sentiment,  and  the  power  of  the  movement  in  favor  of 
temperance,  'and  its  results.  Another  thing,  Mr.  Chairman,  is  in  regard  to 
the  law  of  1832,  taken  as  a  subject  of  judicial  investigation.  I  suppose  there 
were  more  questions  of  law  growing  out  of  that  law  of  1832,  than  there  ever 
have  been  in  any  other  laws  of  this  nature,  unless  it  was  under  the  Maine  Law. 
Almost  every  word,  and  certainly  every  passage  of  that  bill  was  subjected  to 
judicial  investigation ;  and  after  having  gone  through  our  courts  in  every 
form,  the  question  of  the  constitutionality  of  the  law  came  before  the  United 
States  Court,  and  it  was  decided  that  the  law  was  constitutional.  The  law  had 
become  settled  so  that  there  could  be  no  mistake.  The  constitutionality  of  the 
law  had  been  established,  so  that  there  was  nothing  further  about  that,  and  we 
thought  we  were  going  on  swimmingly,  so  that  we  should,  by  and  by,  arrive  at 
that  point  where  there  would  be  no  improper  sales.  We  had  hoped  to  prevent 
the  excess  in  the  use  of  liquor,  and  the  use  of  it  in  the  family,  and  the  use  of 
it  by  the  young,  and  the  use  of  it  on  social  occasions,  so  that  no  man  would 
acquire  those  habits  which  make  him  a  slave  in  his  old  age  ;  and  we  supposed 
we  were  going  on  successfully.  And  the  great  point  of  our  success  was  this, 
— and  the  great  objection  to  the  position  of  my  friends  on  the  other  side, 
which  I  make  on  the  ground  of  law,  is  this, — that  in  carrying  out  this  law  we 
found  a  divided  enemy ;  each  man  fought  upon  his  own  ground — a  man  in 
Paxton  could  get  a  license,  and  a  man  in  Holden  or  Stirling  could  not.  Each 
depended  upon  his  own  action.  There  was  no  combination  between  the 
liquor-dealers.  The  policy  of  divide  and  conquer  was  being  carried  out 
most  successfully ;  and  we  had  nobody  to  encounter  but  some  fellow  who 
stood  alone  in  his  determination  to  sell  rum. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     How  was  it  in  Boston  at  that  time  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say ;  I  am  speaking  in  reference  to  Worcester  County,  and  I 
wish  it  to  be  distinctly  understood  that  what  I  am  showing  is  in  reference  to 
that  county  exclusively.  The  result  was,  that  when  a  man  attempted  to  sell 


8  APPENDIX. 

liquor,  his  neighbors  took  it  up,  and  they  stopped  his  business.  That  was  the 
result  in  town  after  town,  because  there  was  no  combination,  and  there  was 
no  opportunity  to  combine.  If  you  combined  in  two  or  three  towns,  it  would 
not  prevent  the  selectmen  in  another  town ;  so  that  there  was  no  object  in 
combining.  And  the  result  was  that  we  carried  this  measure  (and  when  I 
say  we,  I  mean  the  friends  of  temperance)  ;  we  carried  it  in  detail,  point 
after  point,  individual  after  individual,  until,  in  a  very  large  portion  of  the 
towns  of  Worcester  County,  we  had  substantially  prevented  its  being 
licensed,  and  where  it  was  licensed,,  the  people  took  it  in  their  own  hands 
and  drove  it  out. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     Drove  it  out  by  law  ? 

A.     Drove  it  out  by  public  sentiment. 

Q.  Did  not  the  people  tell  them  that  they  would  prosecute  them  if  they 
did  not  stop  the  sale  ? 

A.     They  did  prosecute  them,  time  and  again. 

Q.     Was  not  that  the  means  employed  by  moral  sentiment  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  and  without  that  moral  sentiment  the  law  would  never  have 
been  of  use,  any  more  than  a  blank  writ  in  the  hands  of  a  sheriff.  I  have 
been  absent  from  that  county  for  ten  years.  I  have  not  been  through 
the  county,  making  temperance  speeches,  since  1852,  and  have  not  had 
occasion  to  inquire  as  to  the  more  recent  condition  of  affairs  there.  I 
would  say  that  in  my  own  native  town  of  Leicester,  complaints  were  formerly 
made  of  places  where  liquor  could  be  obtained.  Soon  after  I  left  Leicester, 
I  believe  there  was  not  a  place  where  you  could  have  got  anything  to  drink. 
In  regard  to  Worcester,  I  know  nothing  about  the  places  for  selling.  I  know 
that  a  friend,  of  mine  met  an  acquaintance  of  his  from  New  Orleans  in  the 
street,  and  his  friend  says  to  him,  "  Come,  let's  go  and  have  something  to 
drink."  But  my  friend  says  to  him,  "  You  cannot  get  anything  to  drink 
here,  the  places  for  the  sale  of  liquor  have  all  been  closed  up."  And  his 
friend  replied,  "  Why,  yes,  you  can  ;  I  have  been  to  more  than  twenty  places 
here  in  this  city."  And  he  had  not  been  in  the  place  two  days.  Now  I  do 
not  know  that  this  was  so  ;  I  merely  speak  of  what  I  have  heard  stated  upon 
that  point. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)     When  was  that  ? 

A.  It  was  about  the  time  I  came  from  there,  about  ten  years  ago ;  it  was 
long  enough  after  the  Maine  Law  was  in  force. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Was  the  law  enforced  ? 

A.  No ;  because  if  it  had  been,  you  could  not  have  got  the  liquor;  that 
is  to  say,  if  it  was  so  ;  I  cannot  say  that  liquor  was  sold.  And  this,  gentle- 
men, was  the  way  we  were  enabled  to  operate.  We  were  going  on  in  this 
successful  manner.  Every  year  we  had  temperance  conventions,  and  many 
of  the  best  temperance  men  in  Massachusetts  took  part  in  them,  and  there 
was  entire  harmony  of  action  about  it,  when  the  measure  of  1852  was 
proposed  and  carried  through.  Now,  sir,  if  I  may  be  permitted  to  make  it 
so  far  a  personal  affair  as  to  make  an  explanation  of  my  views,  and  to  show 
how  far  they  have  been  carried  out,  I  received,  on  the  18th  of  June,  1852, 
from  Rev.  Mr.  Otheman,  a  request  to  join  a  temperance  convention,  to  be 
held  for  the  purpose  of  taking  measures  to  carry  out  the  law  which  had  then 


APPENDIX.  9 

been  just  passed.  Without  reading  the  letter,  I  may  be  permitted,  perhaps, 
to  read  the  letter  which  I  sent  in  reply ;  and  I  was  threatened  with  the 
publication  of  this  letter  at  a  time  when  it  would  have  been  of  some  value  to 
those  who  were  opposed  to  this  matter.  I  say  as  follows,  viz : — 

"  Dear  Sir, — I  am  deeply  sensible  of  the  honor  you  do  me  by  asking  me 
to  meet  some  of  the  friends  of  temperance,  in  view  of  the  proposed  convention 
in  this  place. 

"  A  sense  of  self-respect,  as  well  as  of  respect  for  those  who  have  suggested 
a  wish  that  I  should  confer  with  them,  requires  me  to  state  as  briefly  as  I  can 
why  I  shall  beg  to  be  excused  from  the  conference. 

"  I  understand  the  object  of  such  a  conference  at  this  time  has  reference 
mainly  to  the  law  recently  enacted  by  our  legislature,  and  the  means  by 
which  it  can  be  sustained.  Now  it  has  been  my  misfortune  to  differ  from 
many  of  the  friends  of  temperance,  as  to  the  expediency  of  such  a  law  at 
this  time ;  and  as  the  reasons  for  such  an  opinion  are  satisfactory  to  my  own 
mind,  I  could  not  meet  those  gentlemen  and  openly  express  my  sentiments 
without  seeming  to  them  to  be  opposed  to  the  success  of  the  cause  itself,  and 
placing  me  in  a  false  position. 

"  While,  therefore,  I  have  not  confidence  enough  of  success  in  enforcing  the 
law  effectually  in  this  Commonwealth,  to  take  active  measures  for  its  support 
for  some  time  yet  to  come,  I  am  unwilling  to  appear  to  be  opposed  to  the  ends 
which  its  friends  have  at  heart,  and  therefore  stand  aloof  from  the  discussion 
that  is  going  on  upon  one  side  and  the  other. 

"  And  permit  me  very  briefly  to  state  some  of  the  grounds  of  my  distrust 
of  the  expediency  of  such  a  law  at  this  time.  Everybody  admits  that  it  is 
idle  to  attempt  to  enforce  a  law  for  any  length  of  time  against  the  current  of 
public  sentiment.  The  friends  of  this  law  believe  public  sentiment  is  strongly 
with  them,  and  so  strongly  that  such  a  law  is  not  only  demanded,  but  will  be 
sustained.  I  hope  they  are  right ;  but,  to  my  mind,  the  fact  is  not  so ;  the 
evidence  does  not  satisfy  me  that  they  are  warranted  in  their  conclusion.  I 
remember  the  law  of  1838,  in  the  enactment  of  which  I  took  an  humble  part, 
and  I  cannot  forget  how  we  were  deceived  by  the  professions  of  petitioners 
and  the  power  of  mere  names. 

"  I  know  with  how  much  difficulty  the  law  as  it  was  left  after  the  repeal  of 
the  Act  of  1838,  was  enforced ;  how  much  legal  ingenuity  was  expended  to 
settle  before  our  judicial  tribunals  the  construction  of  almost  every  clause 
and  expression  in  the  statute  ;  how  long  it  was  before  the  officers  of  the  law 
could  feel  any  certainty  that  an  entire  panel  of  jurors  would  sustain  the  law, 
however  strong  the  proof  of  facts  might  be ;  and,  I  think,  I  have  a  right  to 


y  recently 

come,  and  it  seemed  to  me  unwise,  inexpedient,  and  I  feared  almost  suicidal 
to  step  at  once  from  a  platform,  which  had  become  so  well  established,  upon  a 
new  one  that  can  at  best  be  but  problematical  for  a  considerable  time  yet.  I 
thought  if  a  defect  as  to  mode  of  proof,  which  really  did  exist  under  the  old 
law,  had  been  supplied, — and  it  could  easily  have  been  done, — the  cause  of 
temperance  would  have  been  safer  than  it  can  be  under  any  new  system  of 
legislative  restriction.  It  was  a  law  to  which  the  people  had  become  accus- 
tomed, which  they  had  understood  could  and  would  be  enforced,  and  no  new 
issues  could  be  raised  under  it. 

"  On  the  other  hand,  the  present  law,  so  far  as  it  is  new,  is  an  experiment, 
and  one  which  in  order  to  its  success  requires  the  people  as  a  body  to  come  up 
to  its  aid.  It  is  idle  to  think  of  enforcing  it  fci  our  larger  cities  and  towns  by 
means  only  of  the  few  civil  officers  known  to  the  law ;  against  the  passions, 
the  appetite,  and  cupidity  of  the  thousands  who  will  be  found  active,  busy, 
and  united  in  opposing  it,  these  officers  will  be  powerless.  And  if,  as  we 


10  APPENDIX. 

have  every  reason  to  fear,  this  is  to  be  brought  in  as  an  element  of  political 
action,  my  fear  is  the  law  will  find  the  fate  of  that  of  1838,  and  we  shall  have 
to  go  back  and  begin  the  fight  anew. 

These  are  some  of  the  reasons  that  have  influenced  my  judgment.  I  hope, 
or  I  should  say,  I  wish  that  I  may  find  myself  mistaken.  I  could  not  sepa- 
rate from  friends,  with  whom  I  have  so  cordially  co-operated  heretofore,  with- 
out a  frank  expression  of  my  views,  that  they  may  see  that,  although  I  may 
differ  upon  the  question  of  measures,  I  am,  as  I  have  ever  been,  with  them  in 
the  advocacy  of  the  great  principles  for  which  they  are  so  manfully 
struggling.'1 

Now,  sir,  those  were  the  views  that  I  presented  to  my  friends  at  that  time, 
and  from  that  time  I  have  never  had  any  occasion,  and  I  have  never  gone 
forward  with  those  gentlemen  in  the  attempt  to  sustain  the  provisions  of  that 
Act.  I  do  not  believe  now  that  it  can  be  carried  out,  though  I  speak  more 
from  opinion  in  this  matter,  than  from  my  own  direct  observation.  Now,  sir, 
we  lost  by  means  of  that  law  the  entire  moral  power  of  the  community.  It 
was  understood  by  the  community  previously  that  the  law  was  for  the  people 
to  carry  through  of  themselves ;  that  it  was  a  cause  for  them  to  enforce 
instead  of  being  placed  in  the  hands  of  a  few  constables.  Every  man  felt 
that  it  was  a  serious  sacrifice.  I  know  that  my  friends  will  justify  me  in  say- 
ing this.  If  you  threw  off  the  responsibility  on  a  set  of  officers,  it  was  so 
much  easier  to  do  it,  that  I,  for  one,  found  it  all  but  impossible  to  get  any 
one  to  co-operate  with  me. 

I  believe  since  that  time  the  number  of  conventions  have  been  less.  I  may 
be  wrong  there,  but  I  know  that  a  great  many  men  who  used  to  take  active 
parts  in  these  conventions  have  not  taken  part  as  they  did  before,  because  the 
law  was  in  the  hands  of  a  set  of  officers.  It  was  the  duty  of  the  law  to  sup- 
press the  sale,  and  the  law  undertook  to  suppress  it ;  and  there  was  no  reason 
in  the  world,  if  it  was  intended  to  be  carried  out,  that  it  was  not  carried  out. 
We  lost  the  moral  power  with  which  the  law  of  1832  had  been  sustained ; 
but  the  most  important  thing  was,  that  the  moment  you  made  that  law,  you 
made  a  general  cause  of  rum  on  the  one  side,  against  temperance  on  the 
other.  Every  man  that  wanted  to  buy  or  sell,  every  man  that  wanted  to  Jjeep 
a  hotel  and  keep  a  bar,  and  every  man  that  wanted  to  drink,  united  against 
the  cause.  And  I  have  seen  in  the  papers  allusions  to  the  associations  that 
had  been  formed,  and  the  sums  of  money  that  had  been  raised  to  carry  6n 
this  struggle,  until,  as  I  understood,  and  as  I  have  every  reason  to  suppose, 
instead  of  meeting  as  before  the  individual  action,  you  had  to  encounter  the 
combined  action  of  every  man  that  was  opposed  for  any  cause  to  the  progress 
of  temperance.  The  law  gave  them  a  power  in  this,  that  the  law  itself  recog- 
nized the  propriety  of  the  sale.  If  the  law  has  not  been  changed  within  a 
week  or  two,  I  believe  that  there  is  a  provision  that  there  shall  be  agencies 
through  the  apothecaries  for  the  sale  in  case  of  sickness,  or  in  case  of  the  arts 
or  various  other  things,  and  thus  recognizing  the  propriety  and  legality  and 
the  moral  right,  under  certain  circumstances,  of  the  sale.  It  is  not  a  general 
denial  of  the  right  to  sell,  eithir  morally  or  legally.  It  therefore  gave  an 
opportunity  for  this  combination,  which  has  been  operating  since  then. 
There  has  been  a  most  constant  struggle  going  on  in  the  community,  and 
unless  there  is  a  gross  mis-statement  in  regard  to  the  matter,  (it  is  a  thing 


APPENDIX.  11 

Jiat  I  know  nothing  of  personally,)  my  belief  is  that  progress  has  been  very, 
slow,  even  if  there  has  not  been  a  retrograding.  At  any  rate,  at  the  end  of 
fourteen  years  here  stands  the  law,  and  in  many  places  where  I  know  before 
there  were  no  sales,  and  where  there  could  be  scarcely  anybody  found  to 
drink,  there  are  reputed  to  be  those  who  drink  freely.  The  question  has 
occurred  to  me  whether  this  experiment  has  not  been  tried  so  fairly  that  it 
would  be  worth  the  while  to  go  back  in  part  to  the  original  position  while  you 
keep  your  law  as  it  is.  And  I  would  go  as  far  as  any  man  to  enforce  it.  Let 
the  people  have  one,  two  or  three  men,  if  need  be,  licensed.  Let  them  have 
the  authority  to  do  this,  for  they  will  then  regulate  who  shall  sell,  instead  of 
having  these  nuisances  all  over  the  country  as  they  are  now.  And  every 
respectable  man,  (if  you  can  get  respectable  men  to  engage  in  the  business,) 
will  become  a  co-operator  with  the  people  in  the  community  who  have 
licensed  him,  in  order  that  they  may  have  the  thing  properly  regulated  so  as 
to  do  as  little  evil  as  possible. 

I  admit,  Mr.  Chairman,  and  I  beg,  in  justice  to  my  own  consistency,  to  say 
that  I  do  consider  the  selling  of  liquor  under  licenses  to  be  a  moral  evil,  and 
one  which  I  would  gladly  avoid  if  possible.  But  of  two  evils  I  would  choose 
the  less ;  and  I  believe  it  would  be  a  less  evil  to  carry  on  this  sale  under 
proper  restrictions  than  to  carry  out  the  existing  system  of  legislation.  I 
believe  that  you  would  be  doing  a  great  deal  more  good  by  doing  some  evil 
than  you  would  in  leaving  it  as  it  is  now.  That  is  my  conviction.  It  is  an 
honest  one.  I  may  be  mistaken  ;  I  should  be  very  glad  to  believe  that  I  am. 
But  the  observations  that  I  have  made  has  not  led  me  to  believe  the  contrary. 
If  you  could  put  it  into  the  hands  of  counties,  there  are  counties  in  the  State 
that  would  stop  it.  There  are  towns  that  would  stop  it.  The  moment  you 
put  it  into  the  hands  of  the  towns  they  become  interested,  and  they  would 
take  it  into  their  hands  and  would  unite  (what  I  would  desire  above  all  things, 
and  without  which  you  cannot  carry  it  through,)  a  moral  power  with  the  legal 
power  to  carry  out  the  law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  If  I  understand  you,  you  would  leave  it  to  the 
action  of  counties  ? 

A.     Something  of  that  kind.  . 

Q.  Would  not  that  be  substantially  a  repeal  of  the  peculiarity  of  the 
present  law  ? 

A.  I  would  say  that  that  is  a  peculiarity  which  I  would  be  glad  to  get 
rid  of. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  I  would  like  to  ask  you,  whether  from  your  observa- 
tion you  believe  that  the  present  law  can  be  enforced  so  as  to  check  and 
prevent  the  increase  of  intemperance  ? 

A.  All  I  can  say  is,  that  I  am  not  personally  brought  in  contact  with  the 
class  of  people  who  are  more  affected  by  the  use  of  drink.  I  can  say  that  I 
have  taken  great  interest  in  the  inquiries  upon  this  subject.  No  man  has 
heard  me  oppose  that  law.  But  I  have  heard  the  matter  discussed  so  often, 
and  from  such  quarters,  and  from  such  a  variety  of  quarters,  that  it  is  my 
judgment  that  it  cannot  be  enforced. 

Q.  Have  you  any  opinion,  from  your  own  observation,  or  taking  the 
information  that  you  have  received,  that  the  extent  of  intemperance  and  the 


12  APPENDIX. 

extent  of  illegal  sales  now  is  very  far  from  what  is  was  when  the  people 
managed  it  themselves  ? 

A.  From  information  that  I  have,  I  believe  that  in  the  town  of  Leicester, 
for  instance,  and  in  the  town  of  Worcester,  and  some  of  the  other  towns 
which  I  have  mentioned,  there  are  a  great  many  more  sales  now  than  there 
were  then.  In  the  town  of  Worcester  they  have  chosen  year  after  year  a 
temperance  mayor,  and  they  profess  that  they  are  going  to  inaugurate  a 
reform  every  year ;  and  at  the  start  half  a  dozen  Irish  women  will  be  sent 
to  the  house  of  correction  perhaps,  and  afterwards  the  matters  goes  by,  and 
the  current  flows  on  as  before.  At  any  rate,  it  becomes  necessary  at  the  next 
election  to  select  a  new  set  of  men  to  carry  out  the  law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)  What  was  the  state  of  things  in  1851  and  '52  ? 
Was  not  the  liquor  sold  there  then  ? 

A.  I  cannot  fix  the  dates.  I  should  think  there  was  a  decided  difference 
between  1850  and  1853  or  '54.  My  impression  would  be  that  the  meetings 
after  this  law  was  passed  were  less,  and  that  if  sales  were  made  they  wore 
made  more  secretly  than  they  were  at  a  subsequent  period. 

Q.  Don't  you  remember  that  in  1839,  just  before  the  Washingtonian 
reform,  there  was  a  very  great  discouragement  amongthe  temperance  people  ? 

A.  I  think  there  was  after  the  repeal  of  the  "  fifteen-gallon  law."  We 
were  very  much  disheartened,  those  of  us  in  Worcester  County. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Wasn't  there  more  accomplished  after  the  repeal 
of  the  "  fifteen-gallon  law  "  in  restraining  the  drinking  and  selling  of  liquor  in 
Worcester  than  in  any  other  period  before  or  since,  so  far  as  your  information 
goes? 

A.  I  should  say  there  was.  After  the  "  fifteen-gallon  law "  there  was  a 
stagnation,  and  then  there  was  a  revival. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Was  not  that  a  period  during  which  there  was  an 
activity  in  the  cause  of  temperance,  and  in  which  Mr.  Child  himself  was 
active  and  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.    I  cannot  say  about  that. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Up  to  the  passage  of  the  "  fifteen-gallon  law," 
in  1838,  do  you  not  recollect  that  the  moral  efforts  had  abated,  if  not  entirely 
ceased  ? 

A.  I  could  not  say.  I  should  say  that  there  was  not  so  much  zeal  as  there 
was  at  an  earlier  period.  I  should  say  that  perhaps  in  1832  or  '33  there  was 
more  effort  in  the  country  than  there  was  just  before  1838.  But  I  cannot 
say,  as  I  do  not  remember  any  time  from  1828  to  1852,  when  there  were  not 
frequent  public  meetings  in  Worcester  County.  I  know  that  I  went  to  a  great 
number  of  towns,  but  I  could  not  fix  the  times  when  I  went  nor  where  the 
meetings  were  most  numerous. 

Q.  Is  it  not  your  impression  that  up  to  1837  or  '38  there  was  a  decided 
abatement  of  moral  effort  and  a  good  deal  of  discouragement  on  the  part  of 
temperance  men  ? 

A.  As  I  remember,  there  had  been,  in  1837,  an  effort  made,  and  I  con- 
fess I  was  one  of  those  who  had  the  conviction  that  the  law  was  not  strong 
enough  for  us,  and  that  if  we  could  produce  a  more  stringent  law  we  could 


APPENDIX.  13 

carry  through  the  measures  better.  That  was  my  belief  about  ft,  and  I  think 
you  are  right  as  regards  the  time.  My  impression  was  that  if  we  could  get  a 
stronger  law  we  could  get  on  more  successfully,  and  the  law  of  1838  was  the 
result  of  that.  I  will  not  be  certain  about  the  date. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  of  any  moral  subject  coming  up  and  keeping  the 
public  mind  with  a  pervading  and  general  effort  to  change  the  public  senti- 
ment, that  lasted  more  than  five  or  ten  years  ?  Is  it  not  a  natural  law  that 
every  effort  of  that  kind  will  have  particular  periods  of  action  ? 

A.  I  cannot  give  you  any  evidence  on  that  point.  I  was  very  active  pre- 
vious to  that  time,  and  I  am  not  aware  of  my  own  feelings  subsiding ;  and  I 
know  that  we  had  great  obstacles  to  encounter,  and  my  impression,  as  I  stated 
before,  is  that  we  had  a  law  of  this  kind  at  this  time,  and  I  recollect  making 
a  speech  in  favor  of  abolishing  the  license  law ;  and  I  argued  with  a  view  of 
bringing  about  such  a  state  of  things  that  everybody  would  see  how  much 
worse  it  would  be  without  it,  and  become  more  disgusted  with  the  use  and  sale 
of  liquors  generally. 

Q,  Yes,  sir ;  I  have  heard  that  very  doctrine  preached.  But  is  it  not  a 
fact,  distinct  in  your  mind,  that  from  1825  to  1835  —  a  period  of  ten  years  — 
there  was  a  great  deal  of  enthusiasm  in  the  cause  of  temperance,  and  that, 
after  that,  the  friends  of  the  temperance  cause  abated  their  efforts,  and  that 
there  was  a  state  of  discouragement  among  the  temperance  men,  and  that 
they  ceased  their  moral  efforts  to  a  very  great  extent  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  could  not  express  it  in  that  form.  In  1828,  there  were  no 
other  men  of  our  bar  who  were  ready  to  go  out  and  make  temperance 
speeches.  I  remember  it  from  various  causes.  I  know  that  in  1828,  and  for 
four  or  five  years  afterwards,  there  were  not  enough  men  to  go  into  the  field. 
There  was  then  a  disposition  on  the  part  of  many  (and  I  had  a  very  serious 
contest  with  many  of  my  friends  upon  this  matter,)  to  bring  it  into  politics. 
I  told  them  that  the  result  of  this  would  be  that  there  would  be  too  many  men 
who  were  merely  nominal  temperance  men.  Afterwards  there  was  a  desire 
that  there  should  be  a  more  stringent  law  on  the  subject;  and  that  was 
produced  in  1838. 

Q.  I  believe  it  to  be  a  fact  distinctly  understood  that,  after  1838,  the 
moral  efforts  of 'temperance  men  ceased  to  a  very  great  extent;  and  then 
came  the  Washingtonian  reform,  and  that  continued  some  three  or  four  years. 
Now  did  not  the  Washingtonians  drive  almost  everybody  from  the  field  ? 

A.  They  took  a  portion  of  the  field  to  themselves.  I  never  was  associated 
with  the  Washingtonian  movement,  although  I  never  opposed  it.  It  was 
made  up  of  men  of  a  different  character ;  and  while  we  were  at  work  in  one 
field,  they  were  at  work  in  different  fields.  I  am  not  aware  that  they  took 
the  field  that  others  had  been  occupying.  They  took  a  class  of  people  that 
we  could  not  reach.  They  would  not  come  to  our  meetings.  I  should  say 
that  it  was  about  that  time  (although  I  am  not  certain  that  it  may  not  have 
been  later  than  that,)  that  we  used  to  have  meetings  in  Worcester  to  which 
our  first  men  used  to  come,  and  in  which  they  used  to  take  part ;  such  men, 
for  instance,  as  Governor  Lincoln  and  William  Lincoln. 
Q.  Were  they  total  abstinence  men  ? 

A.    I  cannot  say,  sir. 


14  APPENDIX. 

Q.     Was  Mr.  Davis  ? 

A.  I  could  not  say.  But  there  was  a  time  when  we  induced  him  to  come 
forward,  and  he  was  an  active  man  with  us.  He  came  forward  and  made 
one  or  two  of  the  most  eloquent  speeches  that  I  ever  heard.  But  I  should 
say  that  this  was  a  good  deal  later  than  the  time  I  speak  of. 

Q.  I  want  to  ask  you,  if  it  is  not  a  fact  that  the  Washingtonians  got  the 
field,  and  that  they  kept  it  for  three  or  four  years,  and  that,  although  we 
kept  up  our  mo»al  efforts,  yet  the  interest  created  by  the  Washingtonian 
movement  was  so  remarkable  that  it  succeeded  almost  everything  else,  and 
left  us  in  the  coldest  and  deadest  state  ? 

A.    I  thought  the  Washingtonian  appeals  most  unnatural. 

Q.  What  I  want  to  get  at  is  this :  My  friend  wants  to  make  out  that  the 
cause  is  in  a  bad  way,  and  that  it  is  caused  by  the  prohibitory  law.  I  want 
to  show  by  facts,  which  I  distinctly  recollect,  that  the  lowest  ebb  of  tempe- 
rance was  about  1845,  after  the  Washingtonian  storm  had  spent  itself;  and 
that  there  has  been,  until  within  a  few  years,  hardly  a  sermon  preached 
upon  this  subject  at  all.  Does  not  your  recollection  back  me  up  in  that  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  it  does  not:  because  the  facts  that  I  go  upon  go  against  it. 
From  the  record  which  I  have  read,  I  find  that,  in  1830,  the  number  of 
licensed  dealers  in  the  county  of  Worcester  was  371 ;  in  1840,  there  were  69 
licensed  retailers,  and  105  inn-holders  having  licenses ;  and  in  1850,  the 
number  of  retailers  licensed  was  36.  The  number  of  inn-holders  licensed 
was  not  mentioned  in  1850 ;  but  I  should  say  that  the  number  of  inn-holders 
had  diminished  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  the  retailers. 

Q.  Can  you  call  to  your  recollection  the  time  when  it  used  to  be  said  in 
Worcester  that  there  were  few  of  the  dealers  who  did  not  sell  "rot-gut"  ? 

A.  I  have  no  recollection.  I  know  the  subject  was  a  matter  of  dis- 
cussion; and  besides  there  were  occasional  prosecutions.  Let  me  say  one 
word  here.  After  the  time  of  the  Washingtonian  movement,  the  attempt 
was  made  to  prevent  conviction.  It  is  a  fact  that  I  should  not  pass  over. 
Manufacturers  and  a  large  number  of  persons  were  indicted,  and  the 
attempt  was  made  to  prevent  jurors  from  convicting.  But  I  can  say,  from 
my  own  personal  knowledge,  that  jurors  did  convict  universally  in  Worcester 
County.  Men  whom  I  knew  were  dealers  in  liquors  were  upon  juries,  and 
tried  cases,  and  if  the  facts  were  proved,  they  came  up  boldly  to  the  verdict. 
And  I  saw  verdict  after  verdict  where  there  was  a  conviction  by  jurors 
where  some  of  them  were  said  to  be  dealers  in  liquor.  I  recollect  that,  in 
1844  or  '45,  Mr.  Hallett  came  out  there  to  try  some  cases  of  this  kind,  where 
it  was  said  that  you  could  not  convict ;  but  the  jury  came  up  boldly  and 
fairly,  and  convicted. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Did  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  hold  its  session  in 
Boston  at  that  time  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Did  you  hold  it  yourself? 
'    A .    I  did,  some. 

Q.    Was  your  experience  in  Boston  different  from  what  it  is  at  present  ? 

A.  My  attention  has  not  been  recalled  to  that;  I  should  have  to  go  and 
look  at  the  record.  But  in  these  cases  in  Worcester  County,  knowing  where 


APPENDIX.  15 

the  juries  came  from,  I  took  a  deep  interest ;  and  I  recollect  that  the  juries 
behaved  like  men. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  In  your  circle  of  social  acquaintance  twenty 
years  ago,  what  was  the  habit  in  regard  to  the  use  of  liquors  ? 

A.  Before  1828, 1  do  not  know  of  any  families  that  pretended  to  anything 
like  hospitality  who  did  not  make  a  free  use  of  liquor.  The  most  respectable 
and  most  religious  people  had  it  standing  on  their  tables,  or  sideboards,  or 
wherever  it  was.  Twenty  years  ago,  I  should  say  that  it  was  as  rare  to  see 
liquor  offered  in  a  man's  house  as  it  would  be  to  see  medicine  offered.  With 
wine  it  is  different.  I  know  that  in  Worcester,  at  social  parties,  among  the 
first  families  there  were  many  where  there  was  no  wine  offered.  Spirituous 
liquor  was  a  thing  very  rarely  offered  twenty  years  ago. 

Q.     How  is  it  now  ?    Has  there  been  any  change  in  that  respect  ? 

A.    I  could  not  say  in  the  matter  of  spirituous  liquor.    I  do  not  remember 
to  have  seen  any  spirituous  liquor  offered  at  any  time. 
Q.     You  mean  alcoholic  liquors  ? 

A .  I  mean  alcoholic  liquors.  I  see  wine  offered  in  some  cases,  and  in 
some  I  do  not.  I  see  that  it  is  quite  common  to  advocate  wine ;  more  com- 
mon than,  within  my  observation,  it  used  to  be.  That  is  to  say,  I  saw  a  great 
deal  more  wine  drank  in  families,  on  social  occasions,  than  I  did  twenty  years 
ago.  It  may  be  because  I  come  in  contact  with  different  individuals. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  MINER.)     How  long  have  you  lived  in  Cambridge  ? 

A.     About  ten  years. 

Q.    You  have  been  rather  under  Boston  influence  since  then,  have  you 
not? 

A.    I  am  not  aware  that  I  have.    I  was,  of  course,  some. 

Q.    Your  associations  have  been  in  Boston  ?    Then  you  used  to  be  in  the 
country  ? 

A.     That  is  so,  certainly. 

Q.     Would  you  not  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor  if  you  could  ? 

A.    I  would,  sir,  if  I  could. 

Q.    Would  you  sustain  the  present  law  if  you  could  ? 

A.     I  would,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  know  the  number  of  cases  which  are  now  awaiting  sentence  ? 

A.    No,  sir;  I  do  not. 

Q.     Do  you  know  the  number  in  the  State  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  do  not. 

Q.     Should  you  be  surprised  at  five  hundred  ? 

A.     I  should  think  there  would  be  a  great  many  more  than  that.     There 
ought  to  have  been  more  than  that. 

Q.     Would  you  be  surprised  to  find  that  from  three  to  five  thousand  cases 
were  now  awaiting  the  rescript  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Would  you  think  it  wise  to  set  aside  the  present  laws,  and  thus  set 
aside  all  these  cases  ? 

A.     That  is  another  point  entirely. 

Q.    Do  you  think  the  liquor-dealers  who  send  in  these  petitions  concur 
with  you  in  this  matter  of  a  license  system  ? 


16  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  have  never  talked  with  a  liquor-dealer  upon  this  matter,  and  none  of 
them  have  consulted  with  me.  I  should  think  that  I  would  be  the  last  man 
that  a  liquor-dealer  would  come  to  for  any  such  purpose. 

Q.     You  believe  that  a  license  law  would  be  restricting  the  sale  somewhat? 

A.    I  do,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  the  liquor-dealers  have  petitioned  here,  sir  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know,  sir. 

Q.     What  should  you  judge  about  it  ? 

A.     That  is  something  which  I  cannot  tell  you. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion,  judging -from  human  nature,  about  men  engaged 
in  a  criminal  business  asking  for  a  law  restricting  the  carrying  on  of  that 
business  ? 

A.  If  that  was  the  fact,  I  should  say  that  they  would  find  themselves 
badly  bitten  by  such  a  law.  But  if  we  have  a  law,  the  effect  of  which  is  to 
cover  up  the  manufacture  and  sale  of  liquor,  I  do  not  think  it  will  be  found 
to  be  a  favorable  one  to  the  cause  of  temperance. 

Q.  From  your  knowledge  of  human  nature,  would  you  expect  men  en- 
gaged in  a  criminal  business  to  ask  for  a  law  restricting  that  business  ? 

A.     I  should  think  not. 

Q.  Why  are  liquor  dealers  so  sensitive  in  regard  to  the  non-execution  of 
the  present  law  ? 

A.  You  are  now  taking  me  into  a  field  that  I  am  not  at  all  acquainted 
with.  I  cannot  be  examined  on  that,  because  I  am  not  acquainted  with  it. 
I  have  no  recollection  of  saying  a  word  to  any  liquor-dealer  within  the  last 
ten  years ;  and  we  certainly  have  not  discussed  this  matter. 

Q.  Supposing  that  the  State  Constabulary  should  stand  here  and  present 
facts,  under  oath,  if  you  please,  which  shall  show,  not  that  the  statute  cannot 
be  executed,  but  that  it  is  executed,  and  that  that  is  where  the  shoe  pinches  ? 

A.  I  do  not  put  it  so,  for  I  think  you  may  execute  a  law  so  as  to  do  more 
harm  than  good  by  it ;  that  you  may  execute  a  law  in  such  a  manner  as  to 
produce  odium  against  the  law.  I  think  you  cannot  (I  may  be  wrong,) 
enforce  the  law  against  public  sentiment ;  that  you  must  carry  public  senti- 
ment with  you ;  that  you  do  not  begin  at  the  right  end ;  that  to  enforce  the 
law  by  a  few  officers  of  the  law  is  not  the  way  to  reach  the  reform  that  you 
desire. 

Q.  Has  not  the  complexion  of  the  temperance  movement  been  modified 
and  tempered,  and  the  public  mind  brought  to  a  conviction  which  has 
expressed  itself  finally  in  the  prohibitory  law  ?  Is  not  that  the  intended 
utterance  of  the  moral  sentiment  of  the  people  of  Massachusetts  ? 

A.     I  think  it  is  the  utterance  of  those  who  intended  to  urge  it  individually. 

Q.     Have  they  not  urged  it  ?     Are  any  of  the  traffickers  unsatisfied  ? 

A.  I  say  that  I  have  not  passed  a  word  with  a  liquor-dealer  these  ten 
years. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  ask,  if  you  had  a  license  law  such  as  you  propose,  and 
some  of  the  counties  carried  it  out,  (as  undoubtedly  they  would,)  whether  you 
believe  that  Boston  would,  or,  left  to  itself,  could  execute  it? 

A.  My  belief  is  more  a  matter  of  probability,  reasoning  from  cause  to 
effect.  My  own  belief  is,  that  if  you  had  left  the  law  as  it  was  in  1852,  the 


APPENDIX.  17 

pressure  from  the  country  would  have  been  so  strong  upon  Boston  that  it 
could  not  have  stood  it.  My  belief  is  now,  and  was  then,  that  if  you  begin 
with  the  country  towns  you  will  hedge  in  the  business  in  Boston,  so  that  it 
will  be  driven  into  the  hollows  and  out-of-the-way  places,  so  that  it  will  not  be 
respectable  to  deal  in  it.  I  do  not  suppose  that  you  are  going  to  stop  the  use 
of  liquor. 

Q.  Suppose  it  should  appear  that  such  a  number  of  cases  as  I  gave  are 
now  awaiting  sentence, — not  awaiting  trial,  but  awaiting  sentence, — undei 
the  decision  of  which  the  minimum  amount  of  fine  is  fifty  dollars,  and  the 
maximum  amount  two  hundred  dollars.  Do  you  think  that  the  pronouncing 
of  these  sentences  would  .be  detrimental  to  the  cause  of  temperance  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  it  would  have  any  effect  upon  it.  It  might  frighten 
some  men.  I  think  that  if  you  had  a  license  law,  you  could  put  the  carrying 
out  of  that  system  into  the  hands  of  those  who  would  have  some  voice  in  the 
granting  of  the  licenses ;  and  the  men  who  would  be  licensed  would  combine 
with  the  friends  of  temperance,  and  you  would  have  a  better  class  of  men 
licensed  to  sell  than  those  who  are  engaged  in  it  now.  / 

Q.  Speaking  of  the  operation  of  moral  forces,  do  you  think  that  a  reform 
of  this  sort  can  be  carried  to  its  proper  and  legitimate  end  by  moral  suasion 
alone  ? 

A.  I  believe  that  you  will  get  a  public  sentiment  so  strongly  in  favor  of 
prohibiting  the  sale  that  you  will  then  be  able  to  carry  out  your  law,  and  that 
you  will  at  last  get  the  number  of  those  who  would  be  licensed  so  small  that 
there  would  be  (compared  with  what  you  have  now,)  hardly  an  appreciable 
evil ;  there  would  be  an  evil  which  would  be  so  much  less  than  the  present 
evil,  that  I  should  choose  the  first  rather  than  the  latter. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  after  you  get  Boston,  or  any  other  city  to  a  cer- 
tain point,  that  the  business  of  selling  can  be  restricted  any  farther  by  means 
of  moral  suasion  ? 

A.  My  opinion  is,  that  if  you  can  get  a  moral  sentiment  behind  the  law, 
you  will  grow  stronger  and  stronger,  instead  of  weaker ;  and  I  would  have 
the  law  come  up  as  far  as  I  could ;  I  would  have  it  like  a  cog  upon  a  wheel, 
so  that  it  should  hold  on  to  whatever  progress  had  been  made. 

Q.     Is  not  that  the  point  we  have  come  to  ? 

A.  I  don't  think  you  have.  I  don't  think  the  law  is  going  to  stop  drinking. 
I  do  not  believe  you  reach  the  average  judgment  of  the  people. 

Q.  The  prohibitory  law  -has  its  sanction  and  penalty.  And  after  all  the 
discussion  by  which  the  law  has  been  procured,  and  so  far  sustained  upon  the 
application  of  moral  principle,  what  other  action  have  the  people  ?  And 
yet,  you  say,  abandon  it. 

A.    I  think  you  have  relied  more  upon  the  power  of  the  law. 

Q.     Have  we  not  been  applying  moral  principle  through  the  law  ? 

A.  All  I  can  say  in  regard  to  that  is,  that  under  the  old  arrangement 
there  were  twenty  men  ready  on  all  public  occasions  to  advocate  the  cause  of 
temperance,  where  there  is  one  now. 

Q.    Liquor  dealers'  combinations  have  been  referred  to  ? 

A.    I  have  heard  of  them. 


18  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  they  are  rent  asunder,  from  lack  of  funds  to  carry 
the  thing  through  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  was  not  aware  that  a  dollar  had  been  paid  in  by  these 
associations. 

Q.  In  any  great  conflict,  when  the  forces  have  been  marshalled,  and  stand 
in  solid  array,  and  at  the  moment  when  an  issue  is  to  be  determined,  is  that  a 
time  to  retreat  ?  Is  this  a  time  for  the  friends  of  temperance  to  throw  the 
question  into  the  hands  of  the  opposing  forces,  and  allow  them  to  regulate 
temperance  ? 

A.  If  I  could  divide  the  enemy,  and  take  two  or  three  at  a  time,  I  should 
say  that  that  was  better  strategy. 

Q.    When  you  assail  them  man  by  man,  don't  you  separate  them  ? 

A.  You  do  not  separate  the  means  of  business ;  and  you  do  not  defeat 
the  means  of  business. 

Adjourned . 


APPENDIX.  19 


SECOND    DAY. 

WEDNESDAY,  February  20, 1867. 
The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  the  hearing  was  resumed. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  JAMES  A.  HEALY. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     How  long  have  you  lived  in  Boston  ? 

A.     About  twelve  years  and  a  half. 

Q.     You  are  a  priest  of  the  Catholic  Church  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  engaged  in  your  vocation  as  priest,  in  this 
city? 

A.  Since  August,  1854.  I  was  until  recently  secretary  of  Bishop  Fitz- 
patrick. 

Q.     About  how  large  a  number  of  Catholics  belong  to  your  parish  ? 

A.  I  am  not  exactly  capable  of  telling  you  the  number;  but  I  should 
think  every  Sunday  there  must  be  from  five  to  six  thousand  people  at  different 
times. 

Q.    You  have  then  several  different  services  ? 

A.  I  have  several  different  services  in  church  every  Sunday.  The  church 
is  filled  every  Sunday,  and  there  are  many  standing  up. 

Q.  Your  position  of  secretary  of  Bishop  Fitzpatrick — did  that  give  you 
any  opportunities  of  knowing  the  position  of  the  Catholic  people  ? 

A.  Not  that  precise  position ;  but  I  was  most  of  that  time  provisional  rec- 
tor of  the  Cathedral,  and  had  a  pretty  good  opportunity  by  that  means  of 
seeing  the  position  of  people  of  the  congregation.  I  have  also  had  charge  of 
the  poor  of  that  congregation ;  I  have  also  had  charge  of  that  congregation 
for  the  last  ten  years,  so  that  I  have  had  occasion  to  see  a  good  deal  of  the 
poor  people  of  the  congregation  and  their  manner  of  life. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  in  your  own  way,  and  from  your 
point  of  view,  the  present  condition  of  the  cause  of  practical  temperance 
among  the  poor  and  humble  classes  of  the  people  of  your  congregation,  and 
the  effect,  so  far  as  you  have  been  able  to  discern,  concerning  the  operations 
of  the  existing  system  of  legislation  thereon  ? 

A.  Well,  I  should  say,  briefly,  that  the  condition  of  things  at  this  present 
time  was  rather  discouraging ;  that,  so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  observe,  there 
never  was  more  intemperance  than  there  is  at  the  present  time ;  that  intem- 
perance has  spread  from  the  men  to  the  women  and  children,  and  there  are  a 
great  number  who  come  to  me,  (and  there  are  a  great  many  of  them  who 
come  to  me  during  every  week,)  to  take  the  pledge ;  nearly  one-half  of 
that  number  are  women ;  and  the  reason,  so  far  as  my  experience  goes  is,  that 
at-this  present  time,  liquor  is  not  only  used  in  each  house,  but  is  brought  into 
each  family.  Instead  of  being  sold  in  public  places,  in  almost  every  house 
(and  every  tenement  having  a  number  of  families  in  it,)  they  have  some 


20  APPENDIX. 

liquor  and  they  sell  to  those  in  the  house.  The  consequence  is,  that  it  is 
brought  into  the  family,  and  there  the  women  take  it  when  the  husband  is 
out.  So  far  as  my  observation  goes,  I  ?hink  the  use  of  liquor  has  widely 
spread  among  the  poorer  classes.  My  own  observation  in  this  respect  has 
been  pretty  direct,  and  I  have  noticed  the  concurrent  testimony  of  many 
among  my  brethren  that  there  never  was  so  much  intemperance  as  now,  and 
this,  oftentimes  among  the  women.  I  have  seen  children  twelve  or  thirteen 
years  of  age  who  were  confirmed  drunkards ;  and  these  people  are  able  at 
the  present  time  to  get  their  liquor  without  its  being  known.  The  conse- 
quence is,  that  men  and  women  are  not  ashamed  to  get  this  liquor,  because 
they  can  get  it  in  their  houses.  I  suppose  that  in  the  locality  where  a  portion 
of  my  congregation  reside,  there  is  scarcely  a  house  where  liquor  is  not  more 
or  less  sold. 

Q.  What  observation,  if  any,  have  you  made  of  the  quality  of  the  liquor 
which  is  sold  in  this  contraband  and  furtive  manner? 

A.  I  think  I  should  have  ^p  produce  the  testimony  of  those  who  have 
judged  of  it  in  other  countries.  I  have  had  some  knowledge  of  it  in  France, 
where  the  manufacture  of  it  is  under  strict  government  surveillance ;  but  in 
this  country,  we  remark  with  astonishment,  that  among  the  Catholic  people 
there  are  frequent  cases  of  delirium  tremens ;  and  that  after  a  very  moderate 
portion  of  this  liquor  has  been  taken.  I  have  heard  aged  priests,  coming 
here  from  Ireland,  say  that  they  had  scarcely  heard  of  a  case  of  this  kind  in 
Ireland  ;  and  they  attributed  it  to  the  fact  that  liquor  manufactured  there — 
which  is  to  a  considerable  extent  in  private  stills — is  simply  from  grain  and 
malt ;  and  they  state  that  in  this  country  a  very  small  quantity  of  the  liquor 
which  is  sold  to  the  poor,  will  generally  make  them  frantic  whenever  they 
attempt  to  restrict  it.  I  might  quote  an  instance  where  I  had  occasion  to  visit  a 
man  whose  wife  and  daughter  were  urging  him  very  earnestly  to  take  the  pledge. 
I  reasoned  with  him  for  some  time,  but  he  was  unwilling  to  take  the  pledge. 
He  expressed  a  willingness  to  take  it  the  next  week.  The  man  was  by  no 
means  drunk.  I  asked  him  his  reason.  He  said  the  fever  was  on  him  and  he 
must  get  drunk.  He  was  under  some  excitement,  and  I  had  to  exercise  all 
the  authority  that  I  was  able  to  bring  to  bear,  in  addition  to  the  solicitations 
of  his  wife,  who  was  lying  upon  her  dying  bed,  to  persuade  him  to  take  the 
pledge  then,  and  promise  that  he  would  not  get  drunk  that  night;  and  he  told 
me  after  he  had  given  me  his  promise,  that  it  was  the  greatest  struggle  that 
he  had  ever  had.  I  attributed  it  and  he  attributed  it  to  the  quality  of  the 
liquor. 

Q.  What  do  you  judge  to  be  the  moral  effect  of  the  present  system  of 
legislation  ? 

A.  I  suppose  I  ought  to  begin  by  stating  that  it  is  not  only  my  own 
opinion,  but  also  the  opinion  of  many  of  those  with  whom  I  have  been  asso- 
ciated, that  the  moral  effect  of  the  present  law  upon  this  class  of  people,  is 
very  bad.  These  people  consider  that  the  poor  are  the'  ones  who  are 
oppressed  in  this  matter ;  and  the  consequence  is,  that  being  sent  to  the  jail 
or  House  of  Correction,  under  the  present  law,  does  not  seem  to  attach  any 
disgrace  to  it.  Again,  considering  that  it  is  no  crime  to  use  liquor,  there  is 
no  stigma  attached  to  the  sale  of  liquor.  I  do  not  look  upon  it  at  the  present 


APPENDIX.  21 

time  as  having  any  moral  force  with  the  masses  of  the  population.  I  consider 
that  if  it  was  made  a  public  matter,  and  if  licenses  were  issued,  and  if  these 
licenses  were  put  under  a  proper  control,  the  moral  effect  would  be  much 
greater,  and  the  disgrace  of  breaking  over  this  law  would  be  the  same  as  in 
the  infraction  of  any  other  law. 

Q.    You  mentioned  being  in  France  ;  how  long  were  you  there  ? 

A.     Two  years. 

Q.  Did  you  have  any  opportunity  to  observe  the  difference  between  the 
population  with  whom  you  were  concerned  there  and  those  with  whom  you 
have  been  concerned  in  Boston,  in  respect  to  this  one  fact  of  temperance  or 
intemperance  ? 

A.  I  can  say  that  I  was  in  Paris  for  two  years,  and  I  never  saw  a  man 
drunk,  and  I  have  travelled  recently  over  a  good  part  of  Europe,  having 
touched  at  almost  every  port  of  Spain,  and  also  the  southern  part  of  France ; 
also  in  Italy ;  and  I  never  saw  a  drunken  man,  nor  any  sign  of  one. 

Q.  Supposing  this  present  law  were  so  executed  as  that  the  selling  of 
liquor  would  apparently  disappear,  so  that  there  should  be  no  visible  and 
tangible  traffic  in  liquor,  do  you  then  believe  that  the  traffic  would  cease 
entirely  ? 

A.  Well,  if  I  should  state  my  conviction,  I  should  say  I  am  sure  it  would 
not.  I  could  name  localities  where  I  do  not  think  the  officers  would  find  any 
sales  of  liquor,  and  there  would  be  no  appearance  of  liquor  being  sold  at 
the  present  time ;  and  yet  where  there  is  a  great  quantity  of  liquor  sold  every 
day  in  the  week. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  Do  these  persons  who  take  the  pledge  commonly 
keep  it,  or  does  it  only  last  a  very  short  time  ? 

A.  Sometimes  they  take  pledges  of  their  own  accord,  and  of  their  own 
accord  they  mention  for  how  long  a  time  they  will  take  it.  The  general 
average  is  a  year.  Sometimes  they  take  it  for  such  a  period  of  their  life. 
Sometimes  they  fall  back,  and  at  the  end  of  a  year,  perhaps,  they  will  have  a 
good  "  blow  out." 

Q.     The  influence  of  the  pledge,  then,  is  pretty  strong  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  a  great  number  of  them  keep  their  pledges.  We  do  not 
make  it  as  a  religious  vow ;  we  make  it  more  as  a  pledge  of  honor,  acting  on 
the  principle  that  there  is  no  sin  in  the  drinking  of  liquor  according  to  any 
moral  principle  that  we  know  of.  We  cannot  make  a  sin  where  there  is 
none ;  and  accordingly  we  say  to  them  that  the  liquor  has  a  very  injurious 
effect  on  them,  and  we  say  to  them  that  their  honor  and  their  interests  require 
that  they  should  give  up  drinking  it.  Wherever  we  can,  we  obtain  such 
pledges  as  this. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  say  it  is  no  sin  for  a  man  to  do  an  injury 
to  himself? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  it  is  a  sin. 

Q.    Do  you  not  think  that  the  use  of  liquor  is  always  an  injury  to  a  man  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  am  sure  it  is  not. 

Q,  Would  you  recommend  to  a  member  of  your  congregation  to  use 
liquor  ? 

A,     That  is  an  individual  matter. 


22  APPENDIX. 

Q«    Why  do  you  ask  a  man  to  sign  the  pledge  ? 

A.  For  the  reason  that  his  own  experience  has  proved  drinking  injurious 
to  him. 

Q.     How  uniform  do  you  find  the  injury  to  be  ? 

A.     That  depends  upon  the  character  of  the  individual. 

Q.     Are  any  of  your  clergymen  total  abstainers  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Are  you,  yourself? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  You  therefore  hold  such  views  and  your  communion  holds  such  views, 
that  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquor  and  the  sale  of  it  are  proper  ? 

A.    Where  they  are  well  regulated,  sir. 

Q.     How  would  you  regulate  it  ? 

A.  You  might  ask  how  I  would  regulate  the  strength  of  it ;  I  cannot  tell 
you,  because  iny  experience  has  been  in  countries  where  they  use  it  not  only 
day  after  day,  but  at  every  hour  in  the  day ;  and  where  I  have  never  seen 
a  man  drunk. 

Q.     Were  you  ever  in  Marseilles  ? 

A.    I  was  in  Marseilles  and  also  in  Paris. 

Q.     Did  you  not  see  drunkenness  there  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Did  you  visit  Scotland  ? 

A.    I  never  did,  sir. 

Q.     Are  you  aware  of  the  result  of  drinking  of  liquor  there  ? 

A.  I  have  seen  many  that  have  been  there,  and  have  heard  that  its  results 
are  terrible  beyond  belief.. 

Q.    How  will  you  explain  that  ? 

A.  I  judge  of  it  from  the  fact  that  they  drink  stronger  liquor  there.  In 
Marseilles  they  do  not  drink  strong  liquor  as  a  rule. 

Q.    Do  you  mean  that  they  do  not  drink  distilled  liquor  ? 

A.    They  drink  wine  a  great  deal. 

Q.    Is  not  there  a  great  deal  of  distilled  liquor  drank  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  what  you  mean  by  distilled  liquor. 

Q.  I  ciean  a  class  of  alcoholic  liquors  not  produced  by  fermentation,  but 
produced  by  distillation  ? 

A.  If  you  mean  whiskey,  they  do  not  drink  much  whiskey  there.  They 
drink  brandy  more.  But  you  will  observe  that  they  drink  it  in  small  glasses, 
the  same  way  as  we  drink  cordial.  A  man  drinking  coffee,  will  drink  a  little 
brandy  afterwards,  perhaps  ;  but  it  is  only  about  three  thimbles  full. 

Q.  You  say  that  liquor  is  drank  in  almost  every  family  in  the  locality  of 
which  you  spoke  ? 

A.    In  almost  every  family,  sir. 

Q.    It  is  not  made  in  every  house,  is  it  ? 

A.    I  do  not  understand  that  it  is. 

Q.  How  do  you  account  for  it  that  the  people  who  come  here  are  so  differ- 
ently affected  by  it,  from  what  they  were  in  Ireland  ? 


APPENDIX.  23 

A.  There  is  not  so  much  traffic  there  as  here,  I  take  it.  I  do  not  hear  of 
people  in  Ireland  being  so  much  affected  by  it.  I  am  speaking  of  the  experi- 
ence of  those  who  have  come  from  Ireland. 

Q.    Is  not  the  liquor  which  is  distilled  there  contraband  ? 

A.  A  good  deal  of  it  is  contraband  there,  and  I  think  it  is  purer  than 
government  liquor. 

Q.     Government  exercises  supervision  over  liquor  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  judge  the  liquor  here  to  be  good  or  bad  ? 

A.    I  judge  it  very  bad. 

Q.     How  do  you  obtain  satisfactory  liquor  ? 

A.    From  those  who  are  satisfactory  parties. 

Q.  Perhaps  it  would  be  desirable,  on  the  part  of  some,  to  know  where  good 
liquor  can  be  found  ? 

A.  I  presume  the  gentlemen  of  the  Committee  would  be  able  to  tell  where 
it  is  found,  for  themselves. 

Q.  Are  you  not  giving  a  general  opinion  that  the  liquor  which  is  sold  is 
bad? 

A.     I  think  some  of  it  is  very  bad. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  moral  result  of  the  prohibitory  law  ;  and  you  place  it 
on  the  ground  that  the  poor  are  entangled  by  it,  and  not  the  rich  ;  if  its  ope- 
ration was  equally  upon  the  rich,  would  there  not  be  the  same  lack  of  moral 
result  manifested  ? 

A.    I  think  so. 

Q.     Why? 

A.    Because  I  do  not  think  there  is  any  sin  attached  to  it. 

Q.     Then  the  use  of  it  is  not  a  sin  anywhere  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Nor  the  sale  ? 

A.    Nor  the  sale. 

Q.     Then  your  people  do  not  consider  that  it  is  a  sin  ? 

A.  I  said  that  the  excess  would  be  a  sin,  and  the  excess,  as  now  found,  is 
a  sin. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  habitual  use  of  alcoholic  liquors  tends  to  create  a 
tendency  to  drunkenness  ? 

Q.     (By  Mr.  HEALY.)     Do  you  consider  wine  an  alcoholic  liquor  ? 

A.    (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Somewhat,  sir. 

A.  (By  Mr.  HEALY.)  Not  necessarily;  for  I  have  seen  the  people  of 
other  countries  where  there  is  a  constant  use  of  wines ;  where  the  custom  is 
universal ;  where  I  have  seen  no  cases  of  intoxication  ;  and  I  might  cite  an 
instance  of  a  community  in  France  where  I  lived  for  two  years,  and  there 
were  some  three  hundred  young  men,  where  a  case  of  intoxication  would 
astonish  the  community,  and  where,  if  there  had  been  a  case  of  this  kind,  it 
would  probably  have  been  handed  down  from  one  generation  to  another.  I 
never  heard  of  such  a  thing. 

Q.    Perhaps  the  record  was  not  kept  so  strictly  as  in  other  matters  ? 

A.    I  think  if  the  instance  had  occurred  it  would  have  been  recorded. 

Q.    Do  you  know  of  no  cases  of  drunkenness  upon  wine  ? 


24  APPENDIX. 

4.    I  cannot  say  that  I  do. 

Q.     Never  have  ?. 

A.    Never  have.    If  I  did  I  should  tell  you. 

Q.  Do  you  believe,  license  law  or  no  license  law,  prohibitory  law  or  no 
prohibitory  law,  that  wines  will  ever  come  to  be  the  staple  alcoholic  drink  in 
this  country  ? 

A.  I  cannot  go  so  far  in  my  calculation.  I  do  not  know  what  the  result 
may  yet  be.  According  to  the  reports  which  we  now  have,  the  manufacture 
of  wine  in  the  West,  especially  in  California,  is  on  the  increase.  I  cannot  tell 
what  may  come  of  it. 

Q.  Do  you  know  Mr.  Stone,  formerly  the  pastor  of  the  Park  Street 
Church  in  this  city  ? 

A.    I  know  of  him.    I  never  have  seen  him  that  I  know  of. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  he  has  been  called,  since  going  to  San  Francisco, 
to  bear  testimony  to  the  deleterious  influence  .of  those  wines  ? 

A.     I  never  heard  of  it. 

Q.     You  are  not  prepared  to  gainsay  that  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  have  seen  these  California  wines.  I  do  not  know  what 
should.be  so  very  intoxicating  about  them,  unless  they  manufacture  them 
badly,  or  put  in  something  that  would  give  an  extra  strength  in  order  to  suit 
the  American  taste.  Unless  they  have  adulterated  the  wines  in  that  way,  I 
do  not  know  why  they  should  be  so  very  injurious. 

Q.  Do  you  have  that  class  of  feeble  wines  in  this  country  which  you  find 
in  European  countries  ? 

A.  Not  generally :  except  these  native  wines ;  I  consider  them  as  feeble 
wines. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  the  continual  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  has  a 
direct  tendency  towards  drunkenness  ? 

A.  I  say,  that  in  most  cases  you  have  got  to  judge  of  individuals,  as  to 
whether  it  is  likely  to  tend  to  excess.  You  might  as  well  ask  me  if  smoking 
did  not  tend  to  excess  in  the  same  way ;  it  is  the  same  thing. 

Q.     What  is  the  law  of  artificial  appetites  ? 

A .     I  am  sure  I  don't  know,  sir. 

Q.  As  a  priest  of  a  Catholic  Church,  looking  upon  the  mass  of  communi- 
cants, do  they  generally  use  liquor  ? 

A .    They  do,  sir. 

Q.    You  have  testified  to  that  ? 

A.    I  have  testified  to  that. 

Q.     How  would  a  license  law  make  it  any  better  ? 

A .    It  would  prevent  them  from  bringing  it  on  to  their  tables. 

Q.    Why,  if  you  have  a  licensed  store  on  every  corner  ? 

A.     It  would  not  be  at  every  corner. 

Q.  That  would  depend  upon  the  character  of  the  law,  and  how  it  "was 
executed.  Did  you  ever  know  of  its  being  executed  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  I  have,  in  this  country. 

Q.  Do  you  observe,  so  far  as  concerns  your  own  congregation,  that  the 
use  of  intoxicating  liquors  tends  quite  uniformly  to  drunkenness  ? 


APPENDIX.  25 

Q.  (By  Mr.  HEALY.)  Do  you  mean  to  ask  whether  the  majority  of  my 
congregation  are  drunkards  ?  Is  that  the  question  in  plain  words  ? 

A.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  I  mean  the  class  of  your  congregation  of  which 
you  have  been  speaking. 

A.    Will  you  put  it  in  some  shape  in  which  I  can  take  it  better. 

Q.  Did  you  not  state  that  men,  women,  and  children,  in  these  houses,  by 
reason  of  the  liquor  sold  in  these  tenements,  are  drunk  ? 

A.    I  did  not,  sir. 

Q.     What  did  you  say  ? 

A.  I  said  that  they  drank,  and  that  there  were  more  drunkards  than  at 
any  time  I  have  known. 

Q.     Can  you  say  where  legitimate  drunkenness  commences  ? 

A.  That  is  not  for  me  to  determine.  That  is  for  the  man  himself  to 
determine.  If  I  see  a  man  who  is  injuring  himself  by  excessive  drinking,  T 
may  urge  him  to  refrain  from  using  it. 

Q.  Then  you  do  not  hesitate  to  judge  of  a  man  as  to  the  question  of  his 
drinking  ? 

A.    Not  if  it  is  a  plain  case. 

Q.     Does  not  the  action  of  alcohol  tend  to  make  a  man  drunk  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  that  it  does,  necessarily,  sir. 

Q.     What  is  the  effect  of  it  ? 

A .  Well,  we  read  that  wine  "  maketh  the  heart  of  man  glad ; "  that  is  one 
effect  of  it.  There  may  be  other  effects ;  but  I  never  heard  of  its  making  a 
man  drunk  all  at  once. 

Q.  In  relation  to  having  liquor  upon  the  tables  of  those  of  your  communi- 
cants to  whom  you  refer,  how  does  it  appear  that  they  would  not  have  all  the 
facilities  under  a  license  law  that  they  do  now  ? 

A.  I  should  think  you  would  see,  sir,  that  if  it  is  within  their  reach,  in 
their  own  houses,  and  they  have  no  opportunity  of  being  ashamed  of  getting 
it,  they  would  be  likely  to  use  it  with  less  restraint  than  they  would  if  theyt 
had  to  go  further  from  their  houses  to  get  it. 

Q.    Do  they  manufacture  it  in  their  own  houses  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  How,  then,  do  they  have  easier  access  to  it  than  they  would  under  the 
action  of  the  license  law  ? 

A.  I  said  that  in  a  great  number  of  these  tenement  houses,  liquor  is  sold 
in  the  houses. 

Q.    Why  can't  they  d«  that  just  the  same  under  a  license  law  as  now  ? 

A.  They  would  not  dare  to  do  it,  because  I  think  the  law  would  be 
enforced  then,  and  they  would  see  that  it  was  a  fair  trade. 

Q.    How  do  you  make  it  out  a  fair  trade  when  under  restrictions  ? 

A.    Just  the  same  as  the  gunpowder  trade,  perhaps. 

Q.  You  have  observed  that  there  would  be  no  difficulty  in  getting  liquor 
at  the  licensed  places  ? 

A.    Not  that  exactly ;  but  I  don't  think  there  would  be  the  same  tempta- 
tion as  then,  simply  because  they  would  buy  it  at  the  places  licensed,  instead 
of  keeping  it  and  drinking  it  in  their  houses. 
4 


26  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Suppose  the  present  law  were  carried  out  quite  uniformly,  do  you 
think  the  traffic  could  be  broken  down  ? 

A.     I  think  people  would  get  it. 

Q.     Are  you  sure  of  it  ? 

A .  I  believe  that  it  is  so.  I  am  not  among  those  who  put  down  their 
opinions  as  unquestionable ;  but  I  think  that  it  would  be  so. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  are  not  a  native  of  this  country,  are  you? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Were  you  here  when  Father  Mathew  was  here,  and  did  you  know 
him? 

A .    I  was  then  a  student  at  Worcester  College,  and  I  saw  him  there. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  that  a  great  many  persons  signed  the  pledge  through 
his  efforts  ? 

A.     I  do,  sir. 

Q.     Did  he  make  use  of  any  liquors  of  any  kind  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say.  I  have  heard  the  matter  talked  of  pleasantly  among 
friends,  and  a  variety  of  statements  made  on  that  point.  I  never  heard  any- 
body who  was  very  sensible  attach  much  importance  to  it  any  way.  He  was 
considered  to  be  a  devout  man,  and  I  do  not  suppose  that  the  question  as  to 
whether  he  drank  wine  occasionally  or  not,  would  have  any  great  influence 
upon  the  estimate  of  his  personal  character. 

Q.     He  was  a  pledged  man,  was  he  not  ? 

A.     I  cannot  say  as  to  that. 

Q.     Have  you  any  doubt  but  that  he  was  strictly  pledged  ? 

A.     I  never  thought  it  worth  the  while  to  inquire,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Was  the  pledge  that  he  circulated  one  to  abstain 
entirely  from  the  use  of  it,  or  simply  from  drunkenness  ? 

A.    It  was  a  pledge  to  totally  abstain. 

Q.     How  many  who  signed  that  pledge  kept  it  for  four  or  five  years  ? 
•    A.     I  have  no  means  of  judging.     I  have  found  a  great  many  who  have 
kept  it  from  that  time  until  this  day.     Some  have  kept  it  until  recently,  and 
have  come  to  me  to  renew  it. 

Q.     Do  you  not  consider  that  his  efforts  were  a  great  blessing  ? 

A.     Certainly,  a  great  blessing. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)  Do  you  think  that  a  man  would  be  as  successful 
in  obtaining  pledges,  if  he  was  not  himself  a  total  abstainer  ? 

A.  I  have  not  examined  that  question  at  all.  As  I  told  you,  when  we 
put  this  matter  before  people,  the  church  and  the  law  of  Almighty  God  (as 
we  understand  it,)  not  making  it  any  sin  to  take  intoxicating  drinks,  if  not 
taken  to  excess,  and,  therefore,  the  thing  itself  not  being  a  sin,  we  cannot 
say  to  this  man,  You  are  a  worse  man  for  taking  it. 

Q.     Why  don't  you  pledge  your. men  to  moderation  ? 

A.  Because  they  show  that  they  are  not  always  capable  of  keeping 
within  the  bounds  of  moderation.  There  are  some  men  who,  although  they 
are  men  of  great  capacity,  and  ability,  and  strength  of  mind  in  other  direc- 
tions, yet,  in  this  respect,  seem  to  have  physical  or  constitutional  weakness, 
and  especially  those  who  have  in  the  system  a  tendency  to  consumption.  We 
have  remarked,  that  with  them,  as  a  rule,  there  is  a  craving  for  stimulants, 


APPENDIX.  27 

although  they  are  very  dangerous  to  them.  There  are  also  men  who  are 
very  excitable ;  and  sometimes  a  spoonful  will  set  a  man's  brain  on  fire,  when 
another  man  will  take  quite  a  large  quantity  without  as  much  effect  upon  him. 

Q.  Then  you  do  not  mean  that  you  think  the  use  of  liquor  is  weakening 
to  one's  self-control — tending  to  make  an  attempt  at  moderation  unsuccessful? 
You  would  not  attribute  that  to  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A .    I  do  not  say  so. 

Q.     How  do  these  men  happen  to  be  in  a  weak  position  ? 

A.  I  cannot  explain  that  matter ;  it  may  be  a  constitutional  weakness  in 
one  case ;  with  another,  it  may^  be  the  company  which  he  frequents.  It  is 
sometimes  bravado,  to  see  who  will  drink  the  most.  There  are  ten  thousand 
different  things  that  will  sometimes  Ipring  a  man  down. 

Q.  I  should  like  to  ask  you,  Mr.  Healy,  whether,  in  your  opinion,  the 
habitual  use  of  alcoholic  stimulants  has  a  tendency  to  weaken  self-control  ? 

A.  Well,  I  should  say,  directly  and  positively,  no,  sir;  if  you  take  it  as  a 
general  rule  throughout  the  world.  If  you  take  it  in  some  countries,  espe- 
cially in  those  farther  north,  there  seems  to  be  more  of  an  excess  in  the 
extent  to  which  strong  drink  is  used.  In  fact,  you  might  almost  draw  a 
geographical  line  of  division. 

Q.     Then  you  do  not  hold  your  rule  as  applicable  to  New  Englanders  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  whether  I  should  not.  I  don't  know  whether  they  may 
be  further  north  or  south. 

Q.     Which  way  are  we  journeying,  do  you  think  ? 

A .  Well,  according  to  the  present  appearance,  I  should  think  we  were  get- 
ting rapidly  north. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  say  that  one  reason  why  these  people  whom 
you  alluded  to  were  in  the  habit  of  drinking,  was  that  they  felt  that  the  law 
itself  was  an  injustice  ? 

A.  I  did  not  put  that  as  the  cause  why  they  drink.  I  said  that  that  was 
the  reason  why  they  did  not  feel  it  a  crime  to  infringe  it,  because  the  law  was 
so  administered  that  the  rich  escaped  and  the  poor  were  taken. 

Q.  I  think  you  said  that  they  felt  that  the  action  of  this  law  was  unjust 
upon  the  poor  ? 

A.  I  did  not  say  that  therefore  they  drank.  I  said  that  therefore  they  did 
not  think  it  was  a  crime  to  violate  the  law. 

Q.  Suppose  you  have  a  law  where  a  hundred  of  the  best  citizens  are  per- 
mitted to  sell  liquor  in  the  city  of  Boston,  and  everybody  else  was  forbidden 
— that  your  common  people  are  forbidden.  Will  that  commend  itself  to  their 
sense  of  justice  and  lead  them  to  respect  the  law  ? 

A.  They  would  look  upon  it  as  impartial.  All  that  they  want  is  to  get  it ; 
if  they  get  it,  at  the  same  price  as  others.  I  do  not  see  where  the  difficulty 
would  be,  if  the  State  regulate  this  matter  of  sale.  I  do  not  think  any  of  my 
flock  would  regret  it.  Many  do  regret  that  the  temptation  was  so  very  near 
at  hand. 

Q.  You  say  that  in  almost  every  tenement  somebody  sells  it.  Somebody 
lets  the  rooms,  and  the  tenants  feel  under  a  sort  of  obligation  to  buy  of  him  ? 

A.    I  have' heard  so. 


28  APPENDIX. 

Q.  You  say  that  the  buyer  cannot  get  it  if  the  rich  are  licensed,  and  that 
they  will  send  out  and  get  it,  and  that  here  in  almost  every  tenement  is  a  man 
who  has  an  interest  in  selling  it.  What  will  this  man  who  sells  say  if  he  is 
cut  out  of  his  sale  ? 

A.  He  may  possibly  think  he  has  lost  something.  I  have  no  doubt  many 
of  them  might.  At  the  same  time  I  understand  that  the  question  was  one  as 
to  whether  the  sale  of  liquor  is  a  matter  which  can  be  regulated,  and  I  think 
it  can  be  better  regulated  than  it  is  at  the  present  time.  If  you  ask  if  it  can 
be  suppressed,  I  do  not  think  it  can ;  *I  am  not  positive. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  think  the  execution  of  the  law  as  it  is 
going  forward  at  the  present  time  tends  to  increase  the  sale  ? 

A.  I  could  not  tell ;  it  has  not  been  executed,  I  think,  a  sufficient  time.  I 
should  say  that  it  had  only  driven  it  out  of  sight,  but  not  out  of  the  way. 

Q.     Has  there  been  any  execution  of  the  law  in  Boston  ? 

A.    Not  until  recently,  that  I  remember. 

Q,     Are  you  in  the  habit  of  taking  liquor  yourself? 

A .     Yfes,  sir,  when  I  want  it. 

Q.    You  always  do  it  ? 

A .    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  think  that,  if  the  present  law  continues  being  executed  as  it  is  in 
Boston,  it  is  doubtful  whether  it  would  lessen  the  sale  or  the  consumption  ? 

A.  This  is  a  particular  trade,  and  it  is  something  for  which  we  have  a 
tendency  in  this  country,  and  which  cannot  be  so  easily  controlled  as  in  other 
matters.  The  traffic  is  one  to  which  we  have  such  a  universal  tendency  in 
this  country  that  I  judge  that  it  will  be  carried  on  in  spite  of  all  laws. 

Q.  Then  your  doctrine  is  that  the  traffic  in  liquor  cannot  be  stopped,  and 
that  it  is  a  mere  question  as  to  where  and  when  it  shall  be  sold  ? 

A.     About  so,  sir. 

Q.  Then  you  do  not  stand  here  as  a  petitioner  for  restricting  it  to  a 
license  ? 

A.    I  think  a  license  law  will  restrict  the  sale  of  liquor. 

Q.     How,  sir? 

A.  By  confining  it  in  better  regulated  channels  where  you  can  reach  it 
better. 

Q.     Will  you  define  what  you  mean  by  well  regulated  ? 

A,  You  put  the  matter  in  such  a  form  that  I  cannot  answer  you  fairly. 
You  put  it  that  it  is  an  instrumentality  which  at  all  times  is  bad,  and  that  it 
is  sold  to  make  people  drunk.  I  might  instance  to  you  the  French  law,  where 
there  are  regular  licenses  by  the  government.  I  should  think  such  a  system 
might  be  executed  here.  They  do  not  set  it  down  that  there  shall  be  such  a 
number  oF  places.  They  do  not  let  everybody  have  a  license.  But  it  is 
under  the  control  of  the  government,  and  those  who  break  over  the  laws  are 
subject  to  the  punishment  of  confiscation. 

Q.     Then  your  opinion  is  in  favor  of  a  license  law  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  if  it  is  confined  to  a  license  which  is  high  enough. 

Q.  How  can  you  restrict  the  access  to  it,  when  you  have  open  access  to  it 
on  the  pjirt  of  everybody,  though  it  be  by  a  license  law  ? 


APPENDIX.  29 

A.  For  the  reason,  as  I  told  you,  that  very  frequently,  as  in  the  instances 
of  these  families  which  I  have  spoken  of,  there  is  access  to  it  because  it  is 
brought  into  their  houses,  and  is  where  they  can  get  it  and  drink  it  any  time. 
I  think  if  you  had  any  experience  in  that,  you  would  find  that  these  families 
get  drink  because  it  is  brought  right  into  their  houses,  whereas  formerly  it 
was  not  so  much. 

Q.     How  many  places  for  sale  would  you  have  in  Boston  ? 

A.     I  have  not  given  that  subject  a  moment's  consideration. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MIXER.)     How  many  of  your  people  are  habitual  drinkers  ? 

A.  I  never  have  made  any  estimate.  I  suppose  that  a  greater  number  of 
them  are  addicted  to  it  more  or  less.  It  is  an  invariable  rule  on  the  other 
continent  that  wine  or  beer  should  be  used  at  the  table,  and  most  of  them, 
after  coming  to  this  country,  follow  up  the  practice  more  or  less. 

Q.     Are  there  many  of  them  who  are  in  the  habit  of  drinking  brandy  ? 

A.     Some  of  them.     I  do  myself  when  I  want  it. 

Q.     Are  there  any  among  them  who  are  total  abstainers  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Can  you  give  one  ? 

A.    I  should  not  call  the  names  of  any  persons. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  GEO.  F.  HASKINS. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     How  long  have  you  lived  in  Boston  ? 

A.     All  my  life. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  a  clergyman  ? 

A.     About  twenty-three  years. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  to  the  Committee  where  your  parish 
has  been,  and  what  has  been  your  sphere  of  occupation  as  priest  ? 

A.  I  have  been  parish  priest  at  the  North  End  of  Boston  since  1816, 
having  charge  of  all  that  part  of  the  North  End  from  Prince  Street  around 
by  Commercial  Street  to  Quincy  Market,  and  down  Hanover  Street,  and  in 
that  section. 

Q.     Have  you  any  other  charge  save  that  of  parish  priest  ? 

A.     I  have  also  charge  of  the  House  of  the  Angel  Guardian  for  boys. 

Q.     Where,  sir  ? 

A.     At  Roxbury. 

Q.     For  the  instruction  and  care  of  boys  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     What  is  the  number  of  boys  ? 

A.     The  congregation  the  past  year  was  about  two  or  three  hundred  boys. 

Q.     How  large  is  the  congregation  at  the  North  End  ? 

A.     From  ten  to  twelve  thousand. 

Q.     Is  it  so  large  that  you  have  assistance  ? 

A.     Two  clergymen  assist  me. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  to  the  Committee  what  is  the  result 
of  your  experience  and  observation  as  parish  priest,  and  as  having  charge 
of  the  House  of  the  Angel  Guardian,  and  also  as  a  visitor  among  the  poor  ;  of 
the  operation  of  the  existing  laws  upon  the  temperance  or  ijitemperance  of 
the  people  ? 


30  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  am  not  able  to  say  how  far  that  law  has  operated  with  regard  to  the 
change  that  I  am  going  to  speak  of.  When  I  first  took  charge  of  the  parish, 
in  1816,  there  was  not  a  great  deal  of  drunkenness  among  the  lower  people  in 
my  congregation  ;  at  least,  I  did  not  discover  much.  I  did  not  see  much  of 
it,  and  I  did  not  discover  or  hear  of  much  drunkenness,  until  within  the  last 
five  or  six  years ;  but  now  I  can  say  that  it  is  very  excessive.  The  vast 
multitude,  the  mass  of  my  congregation  of  ten  thousand,  are  temperate 
people ;  but  there  are  certain  classes  of  persons  which  have  very  much 
increased  among  us,  and  these  are  people  who  drink  to  excess ;  and  I  have 
found  that  there  are  more  cases  of  women  and  children,  within  the  last  two 
or  three  years,  women  especially,  whose  husbands  have  come  to  complain  of 
them  for  drunkenness,  and  who  have  come  with  their  husbands  to  take  the 
pledge.  There  are  more  of  these  than  ever  before  in  my  experience.  The 
cause  of  it  I  am  unable  to  state,  and  would  not  venture  even  an  opinion 
about  it.  I  do  not  know  what  causes  it.  The  liquor-selling  places  seem  to 
have  multiplied,  there  being  more  smaller  ones  as  the  larger  ones  have 
decreased.  Many  persons  have  given  up  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors,  and 
dealers  that  dealt  rather  extensively  in  it  in  my  district  have  given  it  up, 
their  places  being  closed  by  the  authorities.  But  I  have  found  evidence,  and 
I  have  every  reason  to  believe,  from  the  reports  of  my  assistants,  as  well  as 
from  my  own  observation,  that  the  consequence  has  been  that  the  trade  has 
been  crushed  down  into  the  lower  classes  of  the  people,  and  shoots  out  into 
spurs,  so  to  speak,  and  starts  up  into  smaller  branches.  That  seems  to  me  to 
have  been  the  case,  but  I  would  not  say  what  it  was  caused  by.  That 
appears  to  be  the  fact  as  far  as  I  have  observed. 

Q.  Have  you  any  opinion  on  this  question  ;  and  if  so,  what  is  it — whether 
drunkenness  and  the  tendency  to  excessive  drink  could  be  better  managed  by 
the  clergy  and  others  endeavoring  to  exercise  the  moral  influence  upon  the 
public,  rather  than  under  the  present  system  of  furtive,  contraband  traffic  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  if  the  traffic  could  be  dispensed  with  altogether,  if  it  could 
be  stopped,  it  is  my  opinion  that  it  would  be  the  best  thing ;  but  I  am  of  the 
opinion  that  it  could  not  be  done.  There  is  among  certain  classes  of  men, 
and  among  all  classes,  probably,  more  or  less  of  a  craving  for  stimulants ; 
that  is,  among  certain  persons  of  certain  constitutions  many  seem  to  crave  it. 
If  they  cannot  get  spirits  they  will  get  tobacco ;  and  if  they  cannot  get  that 
they  will  have  opium ;  and  if  they  cannot  get  that  they  will  have  strong 
coffee  or  something  that  will  stimulate  them.  I  think  that  has  been  the  expe- 
rience of  those  who  have  studied  physiology — that  there  are  certain  constitu- 
tions that  crave  excitement.  Now,  I  do  not  know  that  any  law  will  prevent 
this.  If  the  laws  prevent  the  buying  of  liquor  in  small  quantities,  the  people 
will  buy  in  large  quantities  ;  and  if  tlie  law  should  prevent  their  going  to  the 
store  to  buy  a  glass  of  something  to  drink,  then  people  would  go  where  they 
could  get  a  gallon,  or  a  small  cask,  or  an  original  package,  and  that  would  be 
conveyed  into  their  closets,  and  probably  the  landlord  of  the  tenement  where 
they  live,  as  has  been  stated  by  Mr.  Healy,  would  be  the  one  who  would  get 
it,  and  would  probably  give  it  to  the  others.  Therefore  I  think  it  is  for  the 
interest  of  morality  and  temperance  to  control  the  sale  of.  these  liquors.  I 
suppose  that  they  will  be  sold  somehow.  If  the  sale  could  be  checked  alto- 


;  APPENDIX.  31 

gether,  it  would  be  a  desirable  object  to  attain ;  but  if  there  will  be  a  sale 
some  way  or  other,  it  is  best  to  have  the  strong  arm  of  the  law  direct  it. 
That  is  my  opinion. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Do  these  tenements  command  a  high  rent  ? 
A.  They  are  generally  controlled  by  some  one  man.  Generally  some 
one  man  hires  a  whole  block  or  a  whole  building,  and  lets  it  out  to  tenants. 
If  it  is  a  large  building,  they  are  likely  to  keep  a  shop.  I  do  not  say  that 
this  is  so  always,  but  it  is  so  very  frequently.  In  my  parish,  these  little  shops 
at  the  corner  are  very  common ;  and  I  think  if  you  go  into  them  you  will 
not  see  any  appearance  of  the  sale  of  liquor ;  but  still  I  am  confident  that 
there  is  a  jug  or  a  demijohn  somewhere. 

Q.     Those  who  control  these  tenements  are  generally  interested  in  getting 
the  liquor  into  the  tenements  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;,  they  are  interested  because  they  like  to  make  the  profits  off 
the  sales. 

Q.      (By  Mr.  MINER.)      Do  these   tenants  pay  higher  rents  than  ordi- 
nary ? 

A.    Well,  sir,  I  do  not  know  about  that.     They  generally  pay  high  rents. 
The  owners,  who  generally  live  up  town,  find  it  very  profitable. 

Q.    Do  you  suppose  the  owners  have  any  objections  to  the  carrying  on  of 
that  business  ? 

A.     Some  of  them  are  and  some  of  them  are  not ;  some  of  them  are  very 
indifferent. 

Q.    Is  there  not  a  very  much  worse  use  made  of  some  of  those  tenements 
than  the  sale  of  liquor,  and  is  not  that  use  prevalent  in  the  region  you  have 
spoken  of? 
A.    Well,  sir,  in  the  region  of  North  Street,  I  suppose  there  are  worse 


TESTIMONY  OF  Ex-Gov.  JOHN  H.  CLIFFOED. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  inform  the  Com- 
mittee what  your  means  of  observation  have  been,  during  the  last  twenty  or 
thirty  years,  of  the  operation  of  the  laws,  particularly  of  the  criminal  laws  of 
Massachusetts,  and  how  the  existing  system  of  legislation  compares  with  past 
legislation  in  its  advantages  relative  to  the  subject  of  temperance,  or  the  sale 
and  use  of  spirituous  liquors  ?  I  state  the  question  broadly,  in  order  that 
you  may  answer  without  specific  interrogatories. 

A.  I  ought  perhaps  to  say,  Mr.  Chairman  and  gentlemen,  that  it  was  only 
quite  late  last  night  that  I  received  the  summons  to  appear  here,  and  with  no 
knowledge  of  the  specific  purpose  that  the  parties  had  in  view.  I  have  there- 
fore given  no  such  consideration  to  the  general  subject  as  would  enable  me  to 
express  any  opinions  that  I  may  entertain  (though  I  have  very  decided  opin- 
ions upon  this  whole  subject)  in  a  manner  that  would  be  satisfactory  to  the 
Committee  or  counsel.  I  must  therefore  reply  to  the  question  as  to  experience 
very  generally  by  saying,  that  I  have  had  a  very  extended  experience  as  a 
prosecuting  officer  in  this  Commonwealth,  having  held  the  office  of  Attorney- 
General,  or  District  Attorney,  for  about  twenty  years.  I  had  the  honor, 
ten  or  eleven  years  ago  (I  think  1856,)  to  express  my  views  of  the  then 


32  APPENDIX. 

existing  legislation,  in  an  official  form,  by  a  report  which  I  made,  as  Attor- 
ney-General, to  the  legislature.  I  have  now  really  forgotten  the  substance 
of  that.  I  only  know  it  was  esteemed,  by  those  who  did  not  agree  with  me 
in  opinion,  of  sufficient  importance  to  call  out  from  the  State  Temperance 
Committee  a  reply,  which  was  published  in  the  form  of  a  pamphlet.  How 
much  my  friend,  Mr.  Spooner,  has  knowledge  of  that  matter,  he  can  tell 
better  than  I  can. 

But  I  had  no  occasion  to  be  dissatisfied  with  the  reply.  It  was  a  difference 
of  opinion  ;  the  author  of  the  pamphlet  took  a  very  different  view  of  the 
matter  from  what  I  had  taken,  and  in  his  discussion  of  it,  treated  the  views 
which  I  there  presented,  with  entire  respect,  both  for  me  and  my  opinion  ;  so 
that  I  never  felt  at  all  hurt,  whoever  the  author  of  the  pamphlet  might  have 
been.  The  reply  was,  of  course,  to  controvert  the  views  which  I  had 
expressed. 

The  opinion  that  I  expressed  in  that  report  was  one  which  I  have  enter- 
tained ever  since ;  that  the  subject  of  the  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks,  was  a 
subject  of  regulation,  and  not  of  prohibition.  I  regard  the  excessive  use  of 
intoxicating  drinks  as,  with  a  single  exception,  the  most  destructive  to  the 
morals  of  the  community.  I  have  always  supposed  that  it  was  competent  for 
the  intelligence,  the  love  of  morality,  the  sense  of  the  importance  of  preserv- 
ing the  manhood  of  the  people,  for  the  intelligence  of  Massachusetts  assembled 
in  its  legislature,  to  make  such  provision  by  legislation  as,  without  attempting 
the  impossible,  to  accomplish  some  substantial  good,  in  the  way  of  regulation. 
I  held  those  opinions  when  I  was  in  an  official  position  that  brought  constantly 
to  my  notice  the  impracticability  of  success  in  absolute  prohibition.  I  think 
I  ventured  upon  a  prophesy  in  that  report,  that  when  the  people  of  Massachu- 
setts understood  the  operation  and  effect  of  that  law,  some  change  would  be 
demanded  by  them.  I  have  not  been  in  a  position  of  late  years  to  make  an 
examination  in  these  matters  as  closely  as  I  did  then,  but  as  a  citizen  of  the 
Commonwealth,  I  have  seen  nothing  to  change  that  opinion.  I  still  think 
that  this  great  problem  of  how  the  youth  of  the  State  are  to  be  saved,  in  the 
first  place,  from  temptation,  and  in  the  second  place,  from  being  precipitated 
into  desolation  and  ruin,  after  having  yielded  to  it,  is  the  greatest  problem  we 
have  before  us ;  and  is  one  which  is  susceptible  of  some  adjustment,  which 
shall  be  effectual.  I  have  not  undertaken  to  ask  by  petition  that  the  legis- 
lature should  enact  a  license  law.  I  do  not  know  what  conclusion  I  should 
come  to,  as  a  legislator,  as  to  the  mode.  The  only  decided  opinion  that  I 
have,  Mr.  Chairman  and  gentlemen,  is  that  the  existing  legislation  is  not 
promotive  of  the  morality  of  the  community.  And,  if  the  Committee  will 
pardon  me,  I  cannot  help  believing  that  the  condition  of  things  in  which  we 
are  placed,  and  that  this  exigency,  by  which  so  grave  a  problem,  one  so 
apparently  impossible  of  solution,  is  presented,  is  due  in  a  very  great  measure 
to  the  fact  that  men  do  not  act  up  to  their  convictions.  I  will  not  say  that 
there  is  moral  cowardice  in  it ;  but  the  fear  of  being  classed  with  those  who 
are  indifferent  to  the  public  morals,  has  had  much  to  do  with  preventing  legis- 
lators from  addressing  themselves  seriously  to  the  great  task,  and  accomplish- 
ing something  which  will  be  efficient.  It  is  the  understanding,  and  has  been 
for  years,  amongst  the  legislature  and  among  the  people,  that  if  a  inan 


APPENDIX.  33 

expresses  an  opinion  which  is  in  derogation,  in  the  slightest  degree,  of  the 
existing,  legislation,  feeble  and  helpless  as  it  seems  to  be  to  accomplish  any- 
thing, that  he  is  to  be  classed  with  those  who  have  either  opposed  good  order 
and  sobriety,  or  are  in  favor  of  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors.  I  think  that  is 
a  fatal  mistake  ;  it  is  a  mistake,  however,  which  belongs  to  us  as  a  people.  It 
runs  into  all  our  politics.  It  prevents  a  man  to-day,  from  expressing  his 
honest  convictions  sometimes,  with  reference  to  national  affairs ;  so  that  a 
certain  expression  of  opinion,  will  class  one  as  a  copperhead.  And  yet  he  may 
entertain  opinions  which  men  of  strictest  loyalty  may  maintain.  So  in  this 
question,  which  involves  a  great  moral  element,  they  are  more  apt  to  treat  it 
with  indifference,  than  to  treat  it  on  its  own  specific  merits.  I  think  the 
merits  of  any  system  of  legislation  consist  in  some  of  its  specific  merits.  And 
it  has  always  been  found,  that  if  a  certain  persistency  in  a  legislative  proceed- 
ing does  not  accomplish  the  object  designed  by  those  who  instituted  it,  it  is 
the  part  of  wisdom  to  resort  to  some  other.  If  the  end  be  what  I  regard  this 
to  be  on  the  part  of  all  these  gentlemen,  on  both  sides  of  this  question  (as  far 
as  I  know  these  gentlemen  or  their  views,)  it  has  been  to  promote  the  real 
interest  of  the  people  of  this  Commonwealth. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  A  remark  which  was  dropped  incidentally  from 
your  lips,  leads  me  to  ask  whether,  as  a  jurist,  you  have  had  occasion  to  con-, 
sider  this  subject  in  relation  to  the  limitation  of  legislative  power? 

A.  It  was  because  of  my  having  given  much  consideration  to  that  question, 
that  I  made  the  remark  incidentally  which  I  did. 

Q.  Then,  is  it  part  of  your  opinion  that  you  desire  now  to  express,  that 
one  of  the  causes  of  the  fallacy  that  you  observe,  is  due  to  the  fact  that  it  is 
attempted  to  transcend  the  limits  of  governmental  authority  ? 

A.  Undoubtedly.  I  believe  it  is  an  invasion  into  the  region  of  morals, 
where  legislation  cannot  directly  accomplish  its  purpose.  Understand  me, 
however,  I  do  not  think  the  limits  of  legislation  to  be  so  purely  technical,  as 
that  they  cannot  touch  moral  subjects.  On  the  contrary,  I  think  the  duty  of 
legislation  is  to  promote  them  as  far  as  possible.  Indeed,  it  is  one  of  the 
foundation  stones  of  our  republic,  the  promotion  of  morality.  But  I  do  think 
that  an  attempt  is  here  made  to  legislate  against  a  universal  (I  do  not  knoAv 
that  I  can  call  it  by  any  better  name,)  appetite  for  stimulants  in  some  form, 
(and  I  believe  it  is  universal,)  and  an  attempt  to  prohibit  that  by  legislation, 
I  believe  to  be  one  of  the  impracticable  things  which  should  not  be  attempted. 
I  predicted  eleven  years  ago  that  the  people  of  the  State  would  some  day 
find  it  out ;  and  I  am  quite  persuaded  that  the  best  minds  that  have  addressed 
themselves  to  this  subject,  hold  these  views. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  As  a  matter  of  experience,  has  there  been  a 
change  within  fifteen  or  twenty  years,  in  the  habits  of  people  with  regard  to 
keeping  liquors  in  houses  and  keeping  it  on  the  tables,  so  far  as  your  observa- 
tion goes  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  I  should  say  there  had  been,  within  my  observation,  a  change 

in  respect  to  having  wine  upon  the  table.     In  respect  to  keeping  liquors  in 

people's  houses,  I  now  speak  without  reference  to  any  particular  class  of 

society  ;  but  with  the  people  generally,  I  believe  the  change  has  been  greatly 

5 


34  APPENDIX. 

for  the  worse.  I  believe  more  liquor  is  kept  by  the  people  of  all  classes 
(taking  the  average  of  our  country,)  in  their  houses,  than  was  kept  ten  or 
twenty  years  ago. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  Still  there  was  a  time,  ten  or  twenty  years  ago, 
was  there  not,  when  it  was  a  little  disreputable  to  offer  liquor  to  one's  guests, 
in  the  ordinary  range  of  society  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  know  there  has  been  something  of  that  sort.  I  have  in  my 
mind,  however,  two  occasions  when  I  have  happened  to  have  at  my  house,  as 
guests,  two  of  your  predecessors  [speaking  to  Governor  Andrew,]  in  the  office 
of  Governor  of  the  Commonwealth,  whose  opinions  were  as  well  pronounced, 
perhaps,  as  those  of  any  gentlemen  in  Massachusetts,  and  one  of  whom  may 
be  pronounced  an  apostle  of  temperance,  as  he  was  also  the  apostle  of  all  good 
things — Governor  Briggs.  That  must  have  been  quite  twenty  years  ago,  and 
perhaps  was  about  the  time  to  which  you  refer.  It  was  quite  .twenty  years 
ago.  I  had  been  accustomed,  when  having  guests  at  my  table,  to  have  a 
glass  of  wine  on  the  table.  I  knew  Governor  Briggs'  habits,  and  I  knew  his 
views  upon  the  matter  of  temperance.  He  visited  me ;  but  I  still  had  my 
decanter  of  wine  upon  the  table  ;  and  I  spoke  of  it.  He  said,  "  I  should  have 
a  less  good  opinion  of  you  than  I  now  have,  if  you  had  put  it  away  because  I 
was  to  be  your  guest."  At  a  period  subsequent  to  that,  Governor  Boutwell 
was  a  guest  of  mine.  I  had  a  general  party  of  citizens  to  meet  him.  I  had  a 
decanter  of  wine  on  my  table  as  had  been  my  custom,  and  as  was  the  custom 
of  society  here.  Governor  Boutwell  expressed  substantially  the  same  opinion ; 
saying  he  would  be  glad  to  convince  me  of  the  bad  effect  of  using  it  at  all ; 
but  he  would  not  have  me  depart  from  my  social  habits  out  of  deference  to 
him,  because  it  would  be  (what  I  am  afraid  is  very  common  in  matters  of  this 
kind  in  Massachusetts)  simply  hypocrisy. 

Q,  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  I  would  like  to  inquire  your  opinion,  obtained  in 
the  administration  of  the  criminal  law,  whether,  when  laws  transcend  the 
proper  limit  of  legislation  as  far  as  you  have  expressed  the  opinion  that  this 
does,  such  laws  can,  as  a  rule,  be  executed  to  any  good  purpose  ? 

A.  Well,  my  dear  sir,  that  is  a  question  upon  which  I  can  give  no  light, 
to  a  Committee  so  intelligent  as  this.  All  history  teaches  us  that  it  cannot. 
It  is  apparent  in  the  legislation,  and  actual  social  condition  of  the  different 
people  of  the  world,  as  any  fact  which  there  can  be,  it  seems  to  me. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  The  reason  of  my  asking  was,  that  we  are  hearing 
it  expressed  that  just  at  the  present  time  this  prohibitory  law  is  on  the  right 
course  and  being  executed,  and  is  going  to  be  perfectly  executed.  Do  you 
believe  it  possible,  from  your  knowledge  of  criminal  law  ? 

A.  If  I  did  believe  it  possible,  I  should  say,  God  speed  the  work.  If  I 
believed  it  would  improve  the  morals  of  Massachusetts  ;  if  it  would  serve  as  a 
shield  to  my  boys,  who  are  growing  up,  from  the  possible  temptations  which 
they  may  meet,  I  would  certainly  find  myself  in  the  ranks  of  those  who  are 
urging  it  to  its  most  efficient  execution.  But  I  am  very  well  persuaded  that 
it  is  only  a  step  in  the  wrong  direction.  And  from  the  fact,  as  I  believe, 
that  it  tends  to  increase  the  evils  of  intemperance,  I  think  it  will  have  a 
tendency  to  destroy  very  much  of  what  manliness  there  is  among  us,  by  the 
attempts  to  execute  it. 


APPENDIX.  35 

Gov.  Andrew,  Mr.  Chairman,  has  had  the  goodness  to  refer  me  to  my 
report  to  which  I  have  made  allusion,  and  which  I  have  certainly  not  seen  for 
a  number  of  years.  It  is  in  House  Document,  No.  70,  of  the  year  1856. 

I  have  given  the  statistics  in  the  previous  part  of  the  report  of  the  costs  to 
the  Commonwealth.  The  total  was  $108,000  of  taxed  costs  to  the  Common- 
wealth. I  said,  "  These  statistics,  however,  it  should  be  added,  furnish  a 
very  inadequate  view  of  the  expense  to  the  Commonwealth,  arising  out  of  the 
efforts  of  the  public  officers  to  enforce  the  laws." 

But  this  is  the  paragraph  to  which  I  made  special  reference,  as  having  been 
made  the  subject  of  reply  : 

"  In  view  of  these  facts,  it  is  worthy  of  the  serious  consideration  of  the  leg- 
islature, whether  the  results  of  these  prosecutions,  either  in  their  reformatory, 
disciplinary  or  punitive  aspects,  have  been  at  all  commensurate  with  the 
means  and  machinery  which  have  been  found  necessary  to  be  applied  to  them, 
in  the  existing  state  of  public  sentiment  on  the  subject.  My  own  deliberate 
judgment  is,  that  it  has  proved  an  expensive  failure  ;  and  that  new  legislation 
is  required,  to  meet  the  enormous  evil  which  these  statutes  were  hopefully 
designed  to  remedy.  The  character  of  that  legislation,  it  is  not  my  province 
or  my  purpose  to  discuss.  It  is  undeniable,  that  the  people  of  Massachusetts 
are  earnestly  desirous  of  doing,  through  the  agency  of  the  law,  all  that  is 
practicable  for  government  to  do,  by  wise  and  considerate  legislation,  to 
arrest  the  progress  of  intemperance.  But  a  system  which  utterly  fails  to 
accomplish  this  beneficent  purpose,  while  it  adds  in  so  large  a  measure  to  the 
public  burdens,  cannot,  with  an  intelligent  and  practical  people,  be  a  perma- 
nent and  satisfactory  one." 

These  were  the  opinions  which  I  entertained  at  that  time,  in  a  position 
where  I  had  occasion  to  be  very  familiar  with  the  operation  of  the  law  ;  and 
I  can  only  say,  that  I  have  not  yet  seen  any  occasion  to  change  them.  I 
wait,  however,  patiently  and  hopefully  for  some  wiser  man  than  myself  to 
solve  this  problem.  I  think  it  is  a  very  difficult  one. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  £>POONER.)  You  are  not  prepared  to  give  any  plan  of  legis- 
lation which  you  think  would  be  a  better  one  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  should  not  feel  prepared  to  do  that  at  present.  I  should 
wish  for  more  deliberation.  I  think  the  statement  of  witnesses  on  the  stand, 
as  to  what  they  think  is  most  desirable,  is  worth  very  little. 

Q.  I  should  like  to  ask  you  if  your  recollection  runs  back  to  the  time  when 
licenses  were  prevalent  in  this  State,  and  if  you  recollect  their  operation  ? 

A .  I  can  go  back  in  my  early  practice  as  an  attorney  at  law,  to  this  state 
of  things.  Licenses  were  granted  upon  recommendation  of  the»selectmen  of  a 
town,  by  the  Court  of  General  Sessions,  the  predecessors  of  the  Court  of  County 
Commissioners.  Among  the  earliest  retainers  which  I  had,  was  a  class  of  per- 
sons, asking  for  a  license,  who  wanted  the  approbation  of  the  selectmen,  and 
then  going  to  the  Court  of  General  Sessions  for  a  license.  I  can  remember 
very  distinctly  three  or  four  persons,  very  respectable  men,  as  respectable 
men  as  any  in  the  city  where  I  live,  (New  Bedford,)  who  were  grocers,  and 
who  retained  me  not  only  for  the  purpose  of  getting  a  license  for  them,  but  to 
resist  the  licensing  of  others,  upon  the  ground  that  they  would  not  conform 
to  the  existing  regulations,  and  therefore  should  not  have  a  license.  In  other 


36  APPENDIX. 

words,  the  parties  who  retained  me,  did  so  to  keep  improper  persons  from 
getting  a  license.  I  have  repeatedly  been  to  Taunton,  the  county  town,  with 
a  list  of  the  applications  of  those  whom  I  was  to  resist  in  order  to  prevent 
improper  persons  from  being  licensed.  That  is  my  earliest  experience.  Long 
after  I  came  into  the  office  of  District  Attorney,  qualified  licenses  were 
granted,  but  the  principal  part  of  my  practice  was  under  a  system  when  no 
licenses  were  granted.  I  was  appointed  to  that  office  in  1839. 

Q.     Your  memory  goes  back  of  that  to  a  little  extent  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir.     I  came  to  the  bar  in  1830. 

Q.  I  should  like  to  ask  whether,  when  they  gave  licenses  in  the  towns  and 
cities,  they  did  not  give  so  many  that  anybody  could  be  supplied  with- 
out inconvenience,  or  whether  they  were  so  few  that  it  was  inconvenient  and 
operated  as  a  restraint  upon  the  traffic  ? 

A.  I  imagine  the  purpose  was,  to  make  a  convenient  access  to  the  purchase 
for  the  entire  community.  That  is  to  say,  according  to  my  recollection  I 
should  think  that  in  the  city  of  New  Bedford  which  might  contain  a  popu- 
lation, at  that  time,  of  twelve  or  fifteen  thousand  inhabitants,  the  number  of 
persons  licensed  .to  retail  would  be  about  five  or  six.  A  great  many  appli- 
cations used  to  be  made  under  the  old  law  for  a  license.  Under  that  law  the 
selling  to  certain  persons  was  forbidden.  If  one  sold  to  a  person  aftef  the 
seller  had  been  notified  that  the  person  used  it  to  excess,  his  license  was  abro- 
gated. It  was  not  an  unfrequent  thing  for  the  grocers  at  that  time  to  make 
complaints  to  the  Court  of  Sessions,  desiring  to  have  the  license  of  A.  B.,  for 
instance,  revoked,  because  he  did  not  conform  to  the  regulations. 

Q.     Were  they  ever  revoked  ? 

A.  Oh,  I  imagine  so;  I  would  not  undertake  to  say.  Undoubtedly  there 
were  cases  of  revocation. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  As  a  matter  of  practice,  did  the  better  men  get 
the  licenses  to  the  exclusion  of  the  others  ? 

A.  Undoubtedly,  sir.  I  have  in  my  mind  now  two  or  three  persons  who 
in  subsequent  years  were  among  the  most  respectable  men  in  New  Bedford, 
founders  of  families  there,  who  were  at  that  time  licensed  grocers.  One  of 
them  is  now  a  conspicuous  philanthropist  and  reformer. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  Did  not  persons  use  to  sell  without  a  license  to  a 
considerable  extent  ?  Do  you  remember  how  that  was  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  there  were  many.  I  think  they  were  pretty  sharp  to 
see  a  man  who  did  not  have  a  license.  Those  grocers  would  be  pretty  apt  to 
look  sharply  after  a  person  who  were  attempting  to  sell  without  license.  My 
experience  perhaps,  ought  to  be  taken  with  reference  to  the  community  in 
which  I  lived.  It  may  have  been  exceptional.  We  were  a  Quaker  commu- 
nity at  the  period  of  which  I  speak.  The  predominant  influence  was  that  of 
the  Society  of  Friends.  And  although  it  was  a  considerable  sea-port,  with  a 
large  foreign  tonnage,  and  carrying  on  a  most  extensive  whale  fishery,  still  it 
was  an  exceedingly  orderly  town. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  As  an  average,  was  the  class  of  retail  dealers 
superior  in  point  of  character  to  those  who  sell  liquor  now  ? 

A. '  Why,  my  dear  sir,  it  would  be  quite  unjust  to  them  to  institute  a  com- 
parison. It  is  very  much  of  a  contrast.  Of  course  a  contraband  and  prohib- 


APPENDIX.  37 

ited  traffic  brings  in,  to  participate  in  its  profits,  a  very  different  class  of  men 
from  those  engaged  in  a  legitimate  traffic. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  character  of  the 
traffic  has  particularly  changed  here  in  Boston  for  the  last  twenty  years  ? 
Do  you  mean  that  it  is  in  worse  hands  in  Boston  now  than  twenty  years  ago  ? 

A .  I  do  not  know  what  to  say  of  that  class  which  I  had  particularly  in 
mind  in  Boston.  I  suppose  in  the  departments  of  hotel-keeping  and  dealers 
in  wines,  and  importers,  there  has  not  been ;  but  I  should  be  surprised  to  find 
that  there  had  not  been  a  change  and  a  very  marked  deterioration  in  those  who 
have  sold  liquor  in  Boston.  I  do  not  know  how  the  facfis,  but  from  my 
observation  in  my  section  of  the  State,  I  should  say  it  was  marked  and 
distinct. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  your  experience  as  Attorney-General,  and  that  the 
results  were  not  commensurate  with  the  general  expectations  ? 

A.  The  law  was  conceived  in  insincerity.  I  happened  to  be  the  law- 
officer  of  the  governor  at  the  time  that  law  was  passed  in  1852.  I  was  Gov- 
ernor BoutwelPs  Attorney  General.  Very  erroneously,  his  course  upon  the 
subject  of  that  bill  was  attributed  to  me.  He  had  no  conference  with  me 
whatever.  His  first  veto  and  subsequent  signing  of  the  bill  were  entirely  his 
own.  At  the  time  of  the  enactment  I  happened  to  be  here  in  Boston,  and 
there  were  three  gentlemen  who  were  my  fellow  lodgers  at  the  Tremont 
House.  All  three  voted  for  that  bill,  and  after  its  passage  they  came  down 
to  the  Tremont  House  and  celebrated  their  vote  for  the  Maine  Liquor  Law,  as 
it  was  called,  with  a  hot  whiskey  punch  for  all  three  of  them.  I  do  not  think 
I  am  prudish  in  such  matters,  but  I  confess  that  I  was  shocked,  and  I  expressed 
my  feelings  pretty  strongly.  One  of  them  said  to  me,  (a  man  of  no  little  distinc- 
tion,) "  Oh,  this  law  will  never  be  executed ;  it  is  a  mere  sop  to  Cerberus." 
Said  I,  you  have  voted  for  this  law  upon  your  oaths,  and  you  ought  not  to 
vote  for  it  unless  you  believed  that  it  was  to  be  a  law  which  could  and  ought 
to  be  carried  into  effect. 

Q.  I  think  you  were  quite  right  as  to  your  opinion  and  as  to  duty.  I 
should  like  to  ask  you  what,  during  the  period  of  your  administration  as  law 
officer  of  the  Commonwealth,  was  the  position  held  by  the  several  cities  of 
the  Commonwealth,  and  particularly  Boston,  in  regard  to  the  administration 
of  the  law.  You  speak  of  a  large  expenditure  and  incommensurate  results. 
I  should  like  to  ask  what  was  the  influence  of  the  authorities  to  whom  was 
committed  the  execution  of  the  law,  and  particularly  in  Boston  ? 

A.  I  think  the  feeling  was  more  antagonistic al  to  the  spirit  and  execution 
of  the  law  in  Boston,  than  in  any  other  part  of  the  State.  But  I  think  it  was 
equally  true,  in  a  proportionate  degree,  in  the  large  towns  everywhere. 
There  was  no  difficulty  at  all  in  suppressing  the  traffic  in  the  smaller  towns, 
within  my  experience  as  a  prosecuting  officer. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  was  any  sincere  intention,  or  any  real  persistent 
effort  to  execute  the  law  in  the  city  of  Boston,  so  far  as  you  could  officially 
judge  ? 

A.  Yes,  I  think  there  was.  I  cannot  speak  of  Boston  particularly.  I  do 
not  feel  sufficiently  well  advised  as  to  that.  I  know  that,  in  conference  with 
public  officers,  having  in  some  degree  the  responsibility  and  direction  of  these 


38  APPENDIX. 

matters,  it  was  determined  that  there  should  be  a  fair  effort  made  to  execute 
the  law ;  not  with  confidence  that  it  would  succeed.  We  all  understand  that 
that  impairs  very  'much  the  character  of  the  effort.  A  hopeless  task  is  not 
likely  to  be  very  earnestly  pursued. 

Q.  Did  that  effort  ever  go  so  far  in  Boston  as  to  exclude  from  the  jury 
box  men  who  were  engaged  in  the  liquor  traffic  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  In  your  experence  as  a  prosecuting  attorney,  or  as  attorney  general, 
could  you  reasonably  infer  that  any  criminal  of  any  class  would  be  likely  to 
find  his  fellow-cfiminals  guilty  ? 

A.  I  have  an  opinion  on  that  subject  that  may  surprise  you  somewhat. 
When  I  was  a  prosecuting  officer,  I  used  to  feel  a  good  deal  of  assurance  that, 
if  I  could  have  a  rumseller  on  the  jury,  I  should  carry  my  efforts  through  to 
conviction.  I  always  felt  that  it  was  rather  a  help  in  a  case.  I  always  knew, 
if  I  had  one  who  was  obnoxious  to  prosecution,  he  would  be  a  help,  because, 
if  there  was  a  failure  to  convict,  he  knew  very  well  that  he  would  be  singled 
out  as  the  party  who  was  opposed  to  a  conviction  by  failure  of  the  jury  to 
agree.  I  have  known  notorious  rumsellers,  who  would  bring  in  a  verdict  of 
guilty,  and  seemed  to  have  no  sort  of  compassion  for  their  associates. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  has  been  the  general  opinion  in  the  Suffolk  cases  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  do  not.  But  I  do  not  think  that  the  indisposition  was  con- 
fined to  those  directly  engaged  in  the  traffic.  I  think  it  extended  to  a  large 
class  of  men.  I  think  that  many  men  would  reason  thus :  that  they  could 
not  conscientiously  refuse  to  convict  on  many  other  occasions,  and  that  they 
would  be  as  strict  in  this  matter  as  in  others. 

Q.  Do  you  regard  alcohol,  in  any  form,  as  fitted  to  repair  the  waste  of 
nervous  energy  ? 

A .     I  do,  decidedly. 

Q.     Are  you  familiar  with  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Carpenter  ? 

A.  I  am,  somewhat.  I  do  not  think  there  is  a  treatise  on  the  subject  that 
I  have  not  at  some  time  examined. 

Q.     Are  you  prepared  to  controvert  that  opinion  ? 

A.  I  am  not  called  upon  to  controvert  any  proposition  which  is  as  yet  a 
subject  of  controversy  among  those  most  competent  to  discuss  it.  It  is  an 
open  question,  as  I  understand  it,  each  side  of  which  has  its  advocates, 
whether,  under  any  circumstances,  the  nerves  are  injured  under  the  exhaus- 
tion from  the  use  of  intoxicating  drinks. 

Q.  But  is  it  not  a  fact,  that  some  of  the  first  scientific  empiricists  of 
France  have  shown  by  actual  experiment  that  there  can  be  found  in  the 
tissues  of  the  body  only  the  most  minute  trace  of  nutritive  substance  derived 
from  alcoholic  liquor? 

A.  I  think  you  must  excuse  me.  I  submit  to  the  Committee  whether  I  am 
to  carry  on  a  physiological  discussion  upon  so  remote  a  point  as  that.  If  I 
have  given  any  opinion,  the  value  of  which  you  think  would  be  effected  by 
my  opinion  on  physiology,  I  certainly  will  reply  to  you  on  that  subject.  I 
am  not  an  expert,  Mr.  Miner,  on  this  subject,  and  should  not  think  that 
any  opinion  that  I  had  was  worth  any  more  than  those  of  the  Committee. 
And,  besides,  I  have  no  great  faith  in  medical  demonstrations. 


APPENDIX.  39 

Q.  I  should  like  to  ask  you  one  question.  You  spoke  of  the  govern- 
ment's transcending,  in  our  present  prohibitory  law,  proper  governmental 
power.  I  would  like  to  understand  how  you  discriminate  ?  If  the  govern- 
ment has  a  right  to  prohibit  ninety-nine  men  in  a  hundred,  though  it  be  by  a 
license  law,  how  does  it  transcend  its  power  by  prohibiting  the  hundredth  ? 

A.  I  think  the  same  reply  is  applicable  to  that  interrogatory  that  would 
be  applicable  to  the  question,  if  you  should  put  it  to  me,  By  what  right  does 
the  legislature  deprive  a  young  man  of  twenty  years  and  eleven  months 
of  age  of  the  right  of  suffrage,  when  it  gives  it  to  him  who  is  twenty-one 
years  of  age  ?  The  theory  of  government,  I  suppose,  to  be  that,  by  organi- 
zation and  association,  it  shall,  with  the  materials  tliat  human  nature  and 
society  present,  accomplish  the  best  good  possible  and  practicable. 

Q.  I  understand  you  that  the  present  law  transcends  governmental 
authority ;  but  that,  notwithstanding  any  opinion  that  you  have,  if  the  pro- 
hibitory law  could  be  executed,  you  would  bid  it  a  hearty  God  speed  ? 

A.  I  beg  your  pardon,  sir ;  I  only  said,  that  if  it  could  accomplish  the 
results  which  are  claimed  for  it,  and  for  which  it  was  enacted,  and  would 
result  in  the  reformation  of  the  community  and  the  preventing  of  the  use  of 
spirits  to  excess,  I  would  bid  it  God  speed. 

Q.     Which  of  these  points  did  the  law  aim  at  ? 

A.     I  imagine  that  it  aimed  at  both,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  GEORGE  B.  UPTON. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  May  I  ask  you,  sir,  how  long  you  have  been  a 
citizen  of  Massachusetts  ? 

A.     Something  like  sixty  years,  sir,  I  think. 

Q.     You  were  born  here  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Have  you  always  lived  in  Boston  ? 

A.     No,  sir ;  I  lived  many  years  in  Nantucket. 

Q.     How  long  in  Boston  ? 

A.     Sonic  five  and  twenty  years. 

Q.     You  have  been  engaged  in  navigation  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  I  have  been  engaged  in  navigation  for  many  years. 

Q.     Your  name  is  appended  to  one  of  the  petitions,  is  it  not  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  without  any  specific  interrogatories,  I  would  be  glad  to  know 
what  your  opinion  is  as  to  the  effect  of  the  existing  legislation  upon  the  tem- 
perance and  good  order  of  the  community  ? 

A.  My  own  impression  is,  that  all  prohibitory  law  upon  the  subject  of 
liquor-selling — that  is,  an  extreme  prohibitory  law,  that  liquor  should  not  be 
sold  at  all, — is  bad  law.  The  moment  you  tell  a  man  he  shall  not  do  a 
thing,  he  will  be  sure  to  do  it;  but  you  may  ask  him  not  to  do  it,  and  he  will 
listen  to  it.  That  is  my  opinion  on  that  subject.  We  have  appetites  which 
we  have  inherited,  I  suppose,  from  Lot  downwards.  They  exist  within  us, 
and  for  that  reason  they  have  to  be  controlled  rather  by  moral  influence  than 
by  legislation.  I  signed  the  .  petition,  believing  that  a  well  regulated  law 
would  be  better  than  to  undertake  to  carry  out  a  prohibitory  law.  It  would 


40  APPENDIX. 

seem  to  me  that,  so  far  as  our  public  houses  are  concerned,  they  should  be 
allowed  to  give  the  ordinary  entertainment  to  travellers ;  and,  so  far,  perhaps, 
as  eating-houses  are  concerned,  that  they  should  furnish  their  customers  with 
what  is  usual  and  ordinary.  My  own  impression  is,  that  I  should  not  license 
anybody  to  keep  an  open  bar.  That  would  be  my  opinion  from  what  expe- 
rience I  have  had. 

Perhaps  my  views  upon  the  sale  of  liquor  are  peculiar.  I  have  heard 
persons  rail  at  bad  wine,  and  bad  brajidy,  and  bad  gin.  But  I  call  it  good 
wine,  and  good  brandy,  and  good  gin,  but  bad  individual.  You  have  to 
reach  the  individual.  I  don't  know  that  I  can  enlighten  the  Committee  upon 
the  subject.  I  think  there  is  a  great  deal  of  (if  I  may  say)  dissipation.  I 
know  that  many  years  ago  I  happened  to  be  in  the  city  when  the  subject  of 
temperance  was  being  agitated ;  and  I  remember  that  the  surgeons  of  the 
Massachusetts  General  Hospital  published  a  statement,  saying  that  wines  and 
alcoholic  liquors  were  never  necessary,  either  for  medicinal  purposes  or  the 
uses  of  life.  I  went  one  day  to  the  Massachusetts  General  Hospital,  and 
while  I  was  there,  there  was  a  tray  brought  in  with  some  decanters  upon  it, 
and  I  had  the  curiosity  to  ask  what  was  in  them.  Some  of  the  gentlemen 
who  had  signed  the  statement  that  alcoholic  stimulants  were  unnecessary,  drank 
from  the  contents  of  these  decanters.  I  was  informed  that  in  the  decanters 
were  rum  and  gin.  It  would  seem,  therefore,  that,  although  some  distin- 
guished physicians  had  stated  that  alcoholic  stimulants  were  not  necessary, 
yet,  when  it  came  to  ordinary  practice,  they  were  used  in  that  way.  I 
therefore  considered  that,  on  the  whole,  some  stimulants  were  necessary,  and 
that  those  were  the  most  simple  form  of  stimulants  which  could  be  used. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)  When  was  it  that  the  surgeons  of  the  Massa- 
chusetts Hospital  gave  that  opinion  ? 

A.    I  should  think  it  was  something  like  five-and-twenty  years  ago. 

Q.  Are  you  not  mistaken  in  saying  that  they  said  that  alcoholic  liquors 
are  never  necessary  as  a  medicine  ? 

A.    I  have  understood  it  so. 

Q.    I  have  no  knowledge  that  anybody  ever  did  that. 

A.  I  know  they  have  ;  I  know  that  such  a  certificate  was  signed,  when  I 
resided  on  the  island  of  Nantucket,  by  all  the  physicians  there,  stating  that  it 
was  unnecessary  as  a  medicine,  because  I  know  that  one  of  them  sent  to  my 
house  for  a  glass  of  wine  for  medicine,  and  I  told  him  not  to  do  it  again,  or  I 
should  insult  him,  for  he  had  stated  that  he  considered  it  was  immoral  to  use 
it,  and  I  did  not  want  him  to  consider  me  guilty  of  immorality  in  that  form. 

Q.  An  express  provision  of  this  law  is  that  liquors  may  be  sold  for 
medicinal  purposes.  You  say  that,  owing  to  the  natural  indisposition  of  men 
to  be  controlled,  if  you  forbid  men  to  do  a  thing  they  will  do  it  because  they 
are  forbid  ? 

A.    I  say  it  is  pretty  apt  to  create  that  feeling. 

Q.  Yes,  I  know  that  feeling  exists  in  Yankees ;  but  does  it  operate  so  with 
regard  to  lotteries  and  gambling  because  they  are  forbid  by  law  ? 

A.  I  am  not  familiar  with  those  two  subjects,  but  my  own  opinion  is  that 
there  is  a  good  deal  of  lottery-ticket  selling  and  a  good  deal  of  gambling.  I 
know  but  little  about  it. 


APPENDIX.  41 

Q.    Your  memory  goes  back  to  the  time  when  lotteries  were  licensed  ? 

A.    Yes. 

Q.  And  when  they  had  their  schemes  advertised  on  placards  almost 
everywhere  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     And  when  lotteries  were  even  got  up  to  build  churches  ? 
!     A.     Oh,  yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  perhaps  you  recollect  that  on  one  occasion  a  man  by  the  name  of 
Acres,  in  a  store  of  James  Reed  &  Co.,  abstracted  funds  to  the  amount  of 
some  twenty  thousand  dollars,  and  spent  that  money  in  lotteries,  and  then 
committed  suicide,  and  that  a  law  was  passed  entirely  forbidding  lotteries  ? 
Have  you  any  idea  there  was  a  tenth  part  of  the  money  spent  in  lotteries  in 
the  ten  years  after  that  there  was  in  the  ten  years  just  preceding  that  ? 

A.  Probably  not,  for  the  reason  that  lotteries  were  previously  used  as 
schemes  for  carrying  out  particular  purposes.  You  could  sell  tickets  as  well 
now  if  the  law  allowed  it. 

[The  continuance  of  this  kind  of  questioning  was  here  objected  to  by  the 
counsel  of  the  petitioners,  and  ruled  to  be  irrelevant  to  the  subject-matter 
before  the  Committee,  and  inadmissible.]  « 

Q.  I  would  like  to  ask  the  witness  one  further  question.  He  has  given 
the  opinion  that  when  men  are  prohibited  from  doing  a  certain  thing  they  are 
determined  to  do  it.  Why  will  not  a  license  law  operate  in  the  same  way, 
in  so  far  as  it  is  a  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.     You  leave  the  question  open.     A  license  law  is  not  a  prohibitory  law. 

Q.     But  you  do  not  suppose  the  whole  community  is  to  be  licensed  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  would  state  the  question  in  this  way  :  one  side  of  the  ques- 
tion would  be  that  you  leave  the  question  open  for  a  man  to  be  a  temperance 
man  or  not ;  the  other  side  is,  that  a  man  shall  not  be  a  temperance  man,  but 
a  total  abstinence  man. 

Q.  You  would  not  deny  that  the  ninety-nine  men  out  of  the  hundred  are 
forbidden,  would  you  ? 

A.     No,  sir ;  the  ninety-nine  men  are  prohibited  from  it  certainly. 

Q.    Then  the  objection  would  be  against  the  ninety-nine,  would  it  not  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  because  these  men  have  a  right  to  buy  themselves.  It  applies 
to  the  law,  and  not  to  the  buying  and  selling. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  JOEL  PARKER. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  inform  me  how 
long  you  have  been  a  student,  practitioner,  and  teacher  of  law  ? 

A.     Something  more  than  half  a  century. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  on  the  bench  of  the  supreme  court  of  New  Hamp- 
shire ? 

A.     Fifteen  years. 

Q.     And  for  several  years  have  been  professor  of  law  in  Harvard  College  ? 

A.     Nineteen  years. 

Q.  I  would  be  glad  if  you  would  state  to  the  Committee  how  far  you  have 
considered  the  subject  of  the  existing  legislation  of  Massachusetts  upon  the 


42  APPENDIX. 

subject  of  the  sale  of  spirituous  and  fermented  liquor,  in  its  relations  to  the 
limits  of  legislation,  regarded  as  a  scientific  question  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  do  not  know  that  I  can  say  I  have  considered  it  particu- 
larly with  reference  to  any  details  of  legislation.  As  a  general  subject,  it  has 
been  before  me,  as  it  has  been  before  the  rest  of  the  community ;  and  I  have 
formed  an  opinion  in  relation  to  it,  perhaps  in  general,  but  not  with  reference 
to  particular  details  of  legislation. 

Q.     That  opinion  may  be  more  useful  to  us  than  if  it  were  detailed. 

A.  Well,  sir,  my  opinion,  in  a  general  way,  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  1 
signed  one  of  the  petitions  which  I  suppose  is  before  the  legislature,  though 
I  was  not  aware  when  I  signed  the  petition  that  I  should  be  called  upon  to 
give  my  opinion  in  any  other  way.  That  expression  of  opinion  was,  that  a 
license  law  was  desirable,  under  the  existing  state  of  things. 

Q.  Any  opinions  and  views  upon  that  subject,  which  you  may  be  prepared 
to  express,  I  think  the  Committee  will  be  happy  to  receive  ? 

A.  I  am  sorry  to  say  that  I  cannot  claim  to  be  an  expert ;  and  therefore 
my  opinions  are  not  likely  to  be  of  any  great  use  to  the  Committee  or  legis- 
lature. My  opinion  has  been  that  the  prohibitory  law  could  not  be  executed 
for  any  great  length  of  time;  that  it  could  not  be  executed  thoroughly 
throughout  the  community  at  any  time ;  that  if  it  was  executed  to  a  consid- 
erable extent,  to  that  same  extent  the  opposition  to  it  would  probably  increase 
in  the  minds  of  men,  until  it  would  be  overturned ;  that  the  attempt  to  exe- 
cute a  prohibitory  law,  was  opposed  to  that  principle  of  human  nature  which 
craves  excitement  in  some  shape  or  form ;  that  that  principle  would  lead  men 
to  insist  upon  something  which  would  give  that  excitement ;  that  if  it  was  not 
liquor  it  would  be  something  else ;  that  human  nature  could  not  be  re-cast  in 
such  a  Avay  as  that  that  principle  would  be  extinguished,  and  that  it  would 
overcome  any  prohibitory  law  which  would  be  passed,  after  a  time;  that 
though  the  law  might  exist  for  a  period  and  be  executed  to  a  considerable 
extent,  yet  it  never  would  eradicate  the  evil ;  and  that  in  some  respects  the 
effects  of  the  sale  would  be  worse  when  the  attempt  was  made  to  prohibit  the 
sale  entirely,  than  it  would  be  if  its  sale  were  admitted  under  restrictions ; 
and  that  another  evil  which  existed  was  that  while  the  sale  would  exist  under 
a  prohibitory  law,  the  tendency  of  the  sale  under  such  circumstances  was  to 
corrupt  the  morals  of  community  to  the  extent  to  which  the  sale  existed, 
rather  than, promote  them.  Another  objection  against  the  prohibitory  law,  it 
seemed  to  me,  was  its  tendency  to  corrupt  the  community  by  making  it  a 
political  question,  which  it  is  not,  in  its  legitimate  bearings,  and  by  subject- 
ing candidates  for  office  to  catechism  on  their  opinions  on  that  subject,  and 
rejecting  or  electing  them,  not  according  to  their  fitness  otherwise, — not 
according  to  their  intelligence, — not  according  to  their  capacity  to  serve  the 
State  in  the  general  business  of  legislation,  but  according  to  their  opinions  on 
this  subject;  if  they  were  not  qualified  on  this  subject  they  were  not  qualified 
at  all,  and  if  they  were  qualified  on  this  question,  they  were  qualified  on  other 
matters.  Difference  of  opinion  on  that  point  would  corrupt  the  candidates 
and  corrupt  the  electors.  I  have  thought,  from  considerations  of  that  char- 
acter, it  was  desirable  to  allow  and  regulate  what  could  not  be  suppressed  for 


APPENDIX.  43 

any  great  length  of  time,  rather  than  to  have  guilt  prevailing  in  the  commu- 
nity from  attempting  to  enforce  what  was  impracticable. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  history  of  legislation  tends  to  show  that  it  is  possible 
to  make  people  temperate  by  Act  of  Parliament,  by  a  legislative  Act  ?  Does 
or  does  not,  in  your  judgment,  history  show  that  the  attempt  to  do  so  tends  to 
diminish  moral  influences  ? 

A.  Perhaps  I  should  say  that  my  answer  would  depend  upon  the  signifi- 
cation you  give  to  the  word  "  temperate."  I  have  no  doubt  that  legislation 
may,  to  a  certain  extent,  prevent  the  use  of  alcoholic  liquors.  If  you  mean 
by  temperance  that  legislation  may  tend  to  prevent  the  use,  I  should  say  that 
it  might ;  but  if  you  mean  by  temperance  that  the  tendency  of  legislation  is 
to  prevent  drunkenness,  I  should  say  that  it  might  for  a  time  perhaps.  But 
if,  as  I  suppose,  the  people  will  break  over  a  prohibitory  law,  after  a  time,  I 
should  think  it  would  be  worse.  We  are  prone  to  go  to  extremes ;  and  when 
we  get  to  one,  the  pendulum  swings  to  the  other,  very  likely. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  efiect  of  removing  numerous  places  of  sale,  in 
regard  to  removing  the  appetite  for  liquors,  out  of  which  drunkenness  springs  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  that  it  would;  in  fact,  I  think  it  would  not  have  any 
great  efiect  one  way  or  the  other.  I  do  not  think  it  depends  upon  that.  It 
might  to  some  extent,  however ;  because  if  there  were  numerous  places  where 
it  could  be  had,  the  observation  of  one  person  seeing  persons  drinking  might 
excite  his  appetite,  whereas  he  might  not  if  he  had  no  occasion  to  see 
anything  of  the  kind. 

Q.  Suppose  prohibition  were  to  be  made  operative,  as  you  judge  it  might 
be  for  a  time,  to  a  considerable  extent,  what  would  be  the  tendency,  in  your 
judgment,  during  that  period,  in  regard  to  the  probable  condition  of  the  pub- 
lic mind  in  regard  to  the  use  of  liquors  ?  Would  you  be  likely  to  find  as  strong 
and  prevailing  an  appetite  as  existed  before  ? 

A .  Well,  I  could  not  answer  that  with  any  assurance  that  I  could  speak  of 
it  any  better  than  anybody  else  does.  Regarding  this  as  I  do,  as  connected 
with  the  principle  of  human  nature,  that  the  system  requires  excitement  of 
some  kind,  and  that  if  it  does  not  have  it  in  that  way  it  might  resort  to  opium 
or  other  stimulants,  so  that  the  efiect  would  not  be  very  materially  changed. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  think  innocent  amusements  could  be  made, 
to  any  extent,  to  take  the  place  of  alcoholic  excitement,  and  so  obviate  the 
demand  for  that  ? 

A.  I  would  say  that  I  think  they  would,  to  some  extent,  but  not  to  the 
extent  of  causing  a  cessation  of  the  appetite. 

Q.  Does  the  use  of  liquors  tend  to  increase,  by  a  pretty  steady  law,  the 
strength  of  the  appetite  ? 

•  A.  In  some  instances  it  does,  and  in  some  it  does  not,  probably.  That 
depends  upon  the  constitution  of  the  individual,  I  think,  rather  than  on  any 
general  law. 

Q.    Would  you  think  it  would  be  pretty  safe  to  assume  that  as  a  general  law  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  you  could  assume  anything  better,  perhaps ;  I 
should  not  say  that  you  could.  In  relation  to  expressing  opinions,  as  I  am 
called  to  do  to-day,  I  may  say  that  I  have  a  very  distinct  recollection  of  the 
early  initiation  of  the  temperance  movement  in  the  city  in  which  I  then 


44  APPENDIX. 

resided.  The  constitution  proposed  for  the  society  was  one  by  which  the 
members  agreed  to  abstain  entirely  from  the  use  of  all  beverages  that  could 
intoxicate,  (I  do  not  recollect  the  precise  phraseology,)  and  the  objection 
which  was  made  to  that,  when  the  society  came  to  consider  the  constitution, 
was  that  it  went  too  far.  I  had  occasion  to  say  that  I  was  willing  to  abstain 
from  all  ardent  spirits,  and  that  I  would  not  offer  them  to  any  in  my  employ, 
but  that  I  was  not  willing  to  go  further  and  engage  that  I  would  not  use,  or 
offer  to  others  wine,  cider,  or  beer,. because  I  did  not  think  it  was  politic  to 
attempt  so  much. 

Q.     And  that  has  been  your  opinion  until  the  present  time  ? 

A.  Perhaps  I  should  want  to  put  it  in  a  modified  form,  but  I  do  not  know 
that  I  have  changed  my  opinion.  The  society  was  formed  on  that  basis.  It 
was  objected  that  the  society  could  not  stand  on  that  basis,  because,  it  was 
said,  the  rich  could  procure  wine  and  the  poor  could  not ;  and  we  were  met 
with  the  objection  that  we  were  inconsistent.  I  said  in  answer  to  that,  I  am 
not  pressed  with  that  objection.  If  the  poor  man  cannot  get  wine,  he  can  get 
cider  or  beer.  The  observation  that  I  made  at  that  time  was,  that  I  never 
knew  a  man  to  become  a  drunkard  on  cider  alone.  If,  however,  he  uses  alco- 
holic liquors  also,  he  may. 

Q.     Have  you  ever  known  one  to  perpetuate  his  inebriety  by  cider  alone  ? 

A.     I  have  no  doubt  he  might  do  that. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  Will  you  state  whether  or  not  in  your  judgment 
the  theory  of  prohibitory  law  rests  upon  the  postulate  that  drinking  alcoholic 
liquors,  as  a  beverage,  is,  under  all  circumstances,  a  sin  ?  I  exclude  medical 
uses  of  it,  of  course. 

A.  With  some  persons  it  does,  of  course.  I  do  not  know  whether  it  does 
with  all  persons. 

Q.  Whether,  as  a  theory  of  law,  it  could  be  supported  on  any  other  postu- 
late, except  that  drinking,  under  all  circumstances,  is  a  sin  ?  That  is,  the 
argument  would  be :  to  drink  is  a  sin ;  to  buy  to  drink  is  a  sin  ;  to  sell  to  drink 
is  a  sin ;  we  will  punish  for  selling  to  drink ;  and  we  will  not  punish  for 
buying  to  drink,  nor  for  drinking  in  itself. 

A.  If  a  prohibitory  law  could  be  executed  so  as  entirely  to  prevent  drunk- 
enness, without  any  evil  to  the  community  from  the  absence  of  the  means  of 
drunkenness,  I  am  not  prepared  to  say  that  a  prohibitory  law  might  not  be  a 
subject  of  legislation,  without  regarding  it  as  especially  sinful.  The  general 
ground  upon  which  it  is  attempted  to  be  maintained  is,  that  it  is  sinful  in 
itself.  That  is  the  doctrine  of  a  great  many  persons. 

Q.  Is  not  the  difficulty  in  the  execution  of  the  prohibitory  law  radically 
dependent  upon  the  conviction  in  the  minds  of  the  community  that  the 
drinking  itself  is  not  a  sin  ;  that  the  buying  is  not  a  sin  ;  and  that,  if  it  is  not 
sinful  to  buy,  it  is  not  sinful  to  sell  ? 

A.  I  take  it  that  is  one  difficulty ;  I  do  not  know  that  I  could  say  that  it  is 
the  difficulty. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  I  would  like  to  ask  Judge  Parker  if  it  is  at  all  neces- 
sary to  suppose  or  to  assume  that  the  drinking  or  the  selling,  perse,  in  a  single 
instance,  under  all  circumstances,  is  a  sin,  to  justify  a  prohibitory  law,  any 
more  than  the  laying  of  a  tax  to  support  charitable  institutions  demands  the 
premise  that  not  to  give  to  an  individual  in  a  given  case  is  a  sin  ? 


APPENDIX.  45 

A.    I  could  not  say,  sir,  that  I  think  the  two  cases  are  alike. 

Q.     I  do  not  ask  if  they  are  alike  ? 

A.  It  would  depend,  perhaps,  upon  the  question  whether  I  thought  them 
alike. 

Q.  We  lay  taxes  to  support  certain  poor,  under  some  circumstances,  as  well 
as  for  other  strictly  charitable  purposes.  We  cannot  say  it  is  a  sin  not  to  give 
to  this  particular  applicant,  and  yet  the  State  taxes  my  property  and  sells  it  at 
auction  to  pay  that  tax.  Can  that  law  be  justified  ?  Does  not  the  same  pre- 
mise that  justifies  that  law,  namely,  the  public  good,  justify  the  prohibitory 
law? 

A.  Perhaps  you  might  say  that  the  same  reasoning  would  lead  to  the  con- 
clusion that  the  prohibitory  law  was  desirable,  if  you  assume  that  the  public 
good  would  thereby  be  promoted  in  the  same  way,  as  it  would  not.  But  you 
will  understand  that  there  is  an  objection  to  anything  like  sumptuary  law. 
I  should  rest  it  on  the  public  good.  The  foundation  of  the  opinion  which  I 
expressed  was,  that  the  public  good  was  not,  on  the  whole,  promoted  by  this 
law,  and  that  it  is  not  executed ;  and,  so  far  as  it  is  executed,  it  is  attended 
with  certain  evils  which  I  have  endeavored  to  indicate,  and  which  spoils  its 
effect. 

Q.  Do  you  rest  this  opinion  upon  general  principles  of  human  nature,  or 
upon  your  observation  in  relation  to  Boston  for  the  last  fifteen  years  ? 

A.  My  observation  in  relation  to  Boston,  is  nothing,  except  as  that  obser- 
vation is  derived  from  the  newspapers. 

Q.  Have  you  given  any  special  attention  to  the  present  aspect  of  the 
question,  in  relation  to  its  execution  ? 

A.     Only  in  a  general  way,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  CHARLES  HENRY  PARKER. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     Are  you  a  native  of  Boston  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     A  member  of  the  bar  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     You  are  an  officer  of  the  Suffolk  Institution  for  Savings  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Is  your  name  appended  to  the  petition  for  a  license  law  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Without  putting  specific  questions  to  you,  I  would  like  to  have  you 
state  the  grounds  and  the  reasons  upon  which  you  favor  some  other  than  the 
existing  legislation  in  regard  to  the  sale  of  liquors  ? 

Mr.  PARKER.  I  believe  a  license  law  can  be  executed,  and  that  a  pro- 
hibitory law  cannot  be  executed.  I  think  the  prohibitory  law  has  been  fully 
tried,  and  failed  to  obtain  the  ends  for  which  it  was  sought,  and  I  am  in  favor 
of  trying  a  license  law  to  regulate%the  sale,  and  seeing  what  that  will  do. 
My  position  while  in  practice  in  the  same  office  with  my  father,  while  he  was 
a  prosecuting  attorney,  brought  me  in  contact  with  attempts  to  execute  the 
law  for  some  twelve  or  fifteen  years. 

Q.     How  long  ago  ? 


46  APPENDIX. 

A.  It  was  from  1835  down  to  1852,  or  about  that  time.  I  was  in  the 
same  office  with  my  father,  and  personally  acquainted  with  his  attempts  to 
practise  under  the  law,  and  the  attempts  to  execute  it. 

Q.     That  covers  the  period  of  the  "  fifteen-gallon  law  "  ? 

A.  A  portion  of  the  time,  sir.  There  were  great  efforts  made  at  one 
time  to  see 'what  could  be  done  to  enforce  it;  and,  I  believe,  every  means 
were  taken  for  the  purpose. 

Q.     Did  not  the  city  at  one  time  refuse  all  licenses  ?  ( 

A.  Yes,  sir.  They  also  undertook  to  make  complaints  under  the  law, 
and  to  enforce  it.  The  Marshal  (then  Marshal  Tukey)  undertook  to  make 
complaints,  and  obtain  evidence,  and  to  aid  in  getting  convictions.  The 
result  was,  that,  under  the  common-seller  clause,  it  was  almost  impossible  to 
convict.  Exceptions  were  taken  on  one  or  two  single  counts,  which  went 
a  good  ways  towards  deferring  the  decision  ;  and  in  a  vast  majority  of  the 
cases,  there  were  very  few  convictions  under  the  common-seller  indictments. 

Q.  Has  your  position  given  you  any  particular  opportunity  of  forming  an 
opinion  upon  this  point :  whether  the  substantial  execution  of  the  law  was 
such  a;3  to  drive  the  traffic  from  the  surface  of  society,  and  would  it  not  appear 
in  more  dangerous  forms  in  secret,  furtive,  and  contraband  trade  ? 

A.  That  has  undoubtedly  been  the  result  of  the  attempt  to  execute  the 
prohibitory  law.  It  is  done  now  a  vast  deal  under  subterfuge ;  there  is  a  vast 
amount  distilled  in  private  stores,  where  previously  it  has  not  been.  I  have 
known  instances  of  this  kind ;  and  the  result  is,  that  the  sale  has  been  so  open, 
and  at  the  same  time  the  extent  of  the  sale  has  increased,  in  my  opinion. 

Q.  Your  position  in  the  savings  bank  gives  you  some  means  of  observing 
the  operation  of  this  law  among  the  poorer  classes  ? 

A.  Yes ;  I  have  had  frequent  requests  not  to  pay  out  money  where  it  has 
been  under  the  control  of  the  wife,  because  of  its  being  used  to  buy  liquor. 

Q.  You  have  also  had  charge  of  a  benevolent  association,  which  has  given 
you  some  knowledge  on  the  subject  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  a  member  of  the  Boston  Port  Society  whix  h 
maintains  Father  Taylor  ? 

A.     Since  1839. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONEK.)  You  say  that  you  observed  of  the  law  from  1835 
to  1852  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;  during  some  part  of  that  time. 

Q.     Can  you  tell  me  what  the  law  was  during  that  period  ? 

A.    I  think  the  "  fifteen-gallon  law  "  was  in  operation  then. 

Q.     How  long  was  that  in  existence  ? 

A.     Some  eight  or  ten  years^I  think. 

Q.     Are  you  sure  of  that  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  speak  merely  from  impression.  I  speak  particularly  of  the 
difficulty  of  enforcing  the  law,  and  in  establishing  the  count  for  common 
seller,  as  being  greater  than  establishing  a  single  instance. 

Q.  From  the  repeal  of  that  law,  which  was  in  the  winter  of  1840,  up  to 
1852,  the  period  of  which  you  speak,  will  you  please  tell  me  what  the  law  was  ? 


APPENDIX.  47 

A.  Without  looking  at  the  statute  book,  I  should  not  undertake  to  state 
it.  The  practice  was  to  prove  three  instances  of  selling ;  and  there  was  also 
a  penalty  of  twenty  dollars,  or  more,  for  selling  in  a  single  instance. 

Q.     Was  there  not  a  license  law  then  ? 

A.    I  am  not  aware  that  there  was. 

Q.     Do  you  know  how  long  it  is  since  we  have  had  a  license  law  ? 

A.  I  do  not.  I  remember  that,  under  the  old  system,  several  years  ago, 
there  was  a  license  law. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  how  many  they  licensed  in  Boston  when  they  had  a 
license  law  ? 

A.     No,  sir.  9 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  they  suppressed  the  unlicensed  sale  at  that 
tune? 

A.     No,  sir ;  I  have  no  experience  of  that  matter. 

Q.     Under  what  law  did  they  wish  to  suppress  common  sellers  ? 

A.     Under  the  law  that  existed  at  that  time. 

Q.     You  expressed  your  opinion  against  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  did  not  base  my  opinion  on  that  entirely.  I  based  it  on  the 
attempt  to  enforce  such  laws  as  existed.  And  if  the  laws  then  existing  could 
not  be  enforced,  it  amounts  to  still  more  if  the  stronger  laws  could  not  be 
enforced,  where  the  penalty  was  imprisonment  in  addition  to  a  fine  for  being 
a  common  seller,  and  where  it  is  made  a  criminal  offence. 

Q.  Do  you  not  remember  that  your  father  would  get  a  very  large  number 
of  indictments  against  the  sellers  .in  the  city,  and  that  they  would  come  and 
plead  guilty  and  pay  their  fines  ? 

A .  There  was  a  vast  number  of  cases  where  they  paid  their  fines.  But  it  was 
very  difficult  to  get  a  conviction  of  a  common  seller,  and  it  was  impossible  to 
try  them  all,  as  I  have  already  said ;  and  they  occupied  the  time  of  the  court 
to  such  an  extent  that  it  was  impossible  to  try  them  all.  There  were  a  vast 
number  of  cases  where  they  were  willing  to  plead  guilty  on  the  first  and 
second  count,  and  have  that  decision  placed  on  file. 

Q.  If  I  should  tell  you  that  I  helped  to  find  seventy-five  cases  in  half  an 
hour,  under  your  father,  and  that  all  pleaded  guilty,  would  you  be  surprised  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     Then  what  was  the  difficulty  in  enforcing  the  law  ? 

A.  They  pleaded  guilty  in  a  vast  number  of  cases  on  the  single  counts, 
but  not  under  the  common-seller  count. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  the  character  of  the  law  immediately  previous  to 
the  fifteen-gallon  law  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  it  is  not  a  matter  that  I  have  observed  particularly.  I  am 
speaking  merely  of  my  observation. 

Q.     Do  you  remember  the  substance  of  the  law  up  to  1852  ? 

A.    No,  not  in  detail. 

TESTIMONY  OF  LYMAN  NICHOLS. 
Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     You  are  a  citizen  of  Boston  ? 
A.    Yes,  sir. 
Q.     You  signed  one  of  these  petitions  for  a  license  law  ? 


48  APPENDIX. 

A.    I  think  I  did,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  had  any  opportunities  of  forming  opinions  of  your  own  upon 
the  different  kinds  of  legislation  upon  the  subject  ? 

A.  I  should  fully  coincide  with  the  opinions  given  yesterday  by  Governor 
Washburn,  and  to-day  by  Governor  Clifford.  I  do  not  know  that  I  have  any- 
thing to  add  to  them. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     What  is  the  ground  of  your  opinion  ? 

A.  Well,  I  should  say  that  the  .execution  of  a  prohibitory  law  would  be 
impossible  in  large  cities.  I  think  it  could  be  executed  in  small  towns. 

Q.     Would  it  not  do  some  good  in  small  towns  ? 

A.  Well,  I  think  it  doubtful  whether  it  would  do  any  good  there.  •  I  think 
they  would  send  to  the  large  places  and  get  their  supplies. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  men  will  go  in  and  get  liquor  when  it  is  for 
sale  on  the  other  side  of  the  street,  when  they  would  not  send  to  Boston  to 
get  liquor. 

A.  I  never  gave  the  subject  much  consideration,  but  from  a  casual  view  of 
the  case,  I  should  say  they  would  get  a  large  quantity,  when  perhaps  they 
would  go  across  the  street  and  get  a  small  quantity.  I  don't  think  the  evil 
would  be  mitigated. 

Q.     Why  do  you  not  want  to  prohibit  the  sale  ? 

A.  I  think  the  use  and  sale  of  liquor  is  a  great  moral  evil ;  I  think  it  can 
only  be  dealt  Avith  by  using  good  moral  judgment ;  I  think  there  is  no  other 
way  to  deal  with  it,  except  by  a  license  law. 

Q.     What  kind  of  a  license  law  would  you  have  ? 

A.     I  have  never  given  the  subject  any  thought. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  convey  the  idea  when  you  say  if  the  shop 
was  on  the  other  side  of  the  street  he  would  drink  a  glass,  whereas  he  would 
send  to  Boston  if  the  shop  was  closed,  that  it  is  a  less  evil  to  have  it  near  by, 
than  to  have  it  fifty  miles  away  ? 

A.     I  think  that  people  will  have  it. 

Q.     You  talk  as  if  the  freer  the  sale  the  less  the  use  ? 

A.     No,  sir,  I  did  not  say  that. 

Q.     That  is  the  idea  you  convey  ? 

A.  I  say  a  man  would  go  across  the  street,  if  he  wanted  to  get  it,  whereas 
if  he  could  not  get  it  there  he  would  send  to  Boston  and  get  a  large  quantity. 
Therefore,  to  sum  up,  my  opinion  is  that  a  proper  and  stringent  license  law 
would  be  the  best  way  of  dealing  with  it. 

Q.  Therefore  you  say  that  the  injury  is  less  to  get  a  small  quantity  than  if 
he  got  a  large  quantity  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  advocate  the  license  law  in  the  interests  of 
temperance  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  I  do. 

Q.    You  have  taken  a  deep  interest  in  the  temperance  cause  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Why  then  do  you  ask  for  a  measure  to  prevent  the  traffic  ? 

A.  It  is  a  question  which  has  been  the  subject  of  considerable  discussion, 
and  my  opinion  was  solicited  by  the  presentation  of  a  petition  which  I  signed. 


APPENDIX.  49 

Q.    But  you  were  invited  here  ? 

A.  I  did  not  know  anything  about  that  till  I  saw  the  summons  on  my 
table. 

Q.    But  you  were  told  who  wanted  you  ? 

A.    No. 

Q.    Were  you  told  it  was  the  temperance  men  who  wanted  you  here  ? 

A.  It  did  not  occur  to  me  why  I  was  summoned  here  until  a  gentleman 
reminded  me  that  I  had  signed  such  a  petition. 

Q.  Did  it  ever  occur  to  you  as  a  singular  fact,  that  the  merchants  of 
Boston  want  a  law  to  restrict  the  sale,  and  that  the  dealers  want  a  license-  law 
to  permit  them  to  sell  ? 

A .    I  have  not  taken  that  matter  into  consideration. 

Adjourned. 


50  APPENDIX. 


THIRD    DAY. 

THURSDAY,  February  21, 1867. 

The  Committee  resumed  its  session  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  the  hearing  of 
testimony  was  further  continued. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  GEORGE  S.  HILLARD. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW).  You  have  been  in  Boston  many  years,  have  you 
not? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  a  good  many. 

Q.     And  been  a  member  of  the  bar  for  a  good  many  years  also  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  upwards  of  thirty. 

Q.     Have  you,  at  any  time  in  your  life,  travelled  in  Europe  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  have  been  in  Europe  twice ;  once  in  1847  or  '48,  and^gain 
in  1859. 

Q.  Have  you  had  any  opportunity  of  observing  the  effects  of  the  native 
•wines  in  the  vine-growing  countries  there  ? 

A.  I  answering  that  question,  you  will  allow  me  to  include  more  in  my 
answer  than  is  involved  directly  in  the  question.  1  have  visited  England, 
Scotland,  Switzerland,  Belgium,  Holland,  France,  a  portion  of  Germany,  a 
considerable  portion  of  the  Tyrol,  and  also  Italy,  and  have  had  some  means 
of  observation  which  I  have  improved.  In  the-  first  place,  I  will  state,  that  it 
struck  me  as  rather  remarkable  that  water  unmixed  is  hardly  used  as  a  bev- 
erage at  all,  in  any  of  those  countries,  by  what  may  be  called  the  favored 
classes.  In  England  and  Scotland,  ale  and  wine  are  consumed  to  a  great  extent 
by  all  persons  in  a  certain  rank  of  life ;  that  is,  it  is  the  daily  and  general 
rule.  Take  the  members  of  the  three  learned  professions,  and  including  mer- 
chants, bankers,  and  tradesmen,  and  all  persons  above  the  condition  of  pov- 
erty, their  common  beverage  is  something  else  than  water.  Malt  liquor  is 
very  much  used ;  and  where  there  is  a  fortune  it  is  wine.  In  the  other 
countries,  and  especially  in  Belgium  and  Switzerland,  wine  is  an  article  of 
daily  consumption  among  all  persons  who  can  afford  it.  It  is  drank  pure,  but 
almost  always  with  water.  In  every  table  d'hote,  you  sec  a  bottle  or  half-bottle 
at  every  guest's  table.  As  a  general  rule,  it  is  drank  mixed  with  water.  But  it 
is  almost  literally  true,  that  you  will  never  see  a  person  drink  a  glass  of  water 
until  you  get  to  Rome,  where  the  water  is  very  good.  In  England,  the  water 
is  very  bad.  Now  I  come  to  the  question  of  intemperance.  Intemperance  is 
an  evil  in  almost  all  the  northern  portions  of  Europe.  But  I  think  there  is  no 
country  in  which  intemperance  is  so  great  an  evil  as  it  is  in  America.  The 


APPENDIX.  51 

difficulty  is,  that  that  there  is  a  peculiar  tendency  of  the  American  mind  and 
temperament  to  go  to  excess.  It  runs  through  everything.  If  we  have  a 
virtue,  we,  are  apt  to  push  it  to  fanaticism.  If  a  person  does  not  drink  strong 
drink,  he  insists  upon  it  that  everybody  else  must  not.  On  the  other  hand, 
if  a  person  drinks,  he  is  apt  to  drink  too  much.  It  is  an  American  trait.  I 
was  in  Europe  in  1859,  and  a  very  intelligent  physician  says  to  me,  —  "  You 
Americans  destroy  your  health  by  two  things  ;  one  is  tobacco,  and  the  other 
ardent  spirits ;  these  are  the  two  sources  of  disease  in  your  country."  One  of 
the  difficulties  i-n  our  country  is,  that  we  drink  ardent  spirit,  which  is  not,  by 
any  moans,  so  much  the  case  in  Europe  ;  and  in  the  next  place,  we  have  here 
a  pernicious  habit  of  drinking  without  eating,  or  dram-drinking.  I  should 
say,  from  my  observation,  that  nine-tenths  of  the  evil  in  this  country  from  the 
use  of  liquor,  arises  from  the  habit  of  dram-drinking,  where  the  effect  of 
liquors,  as  every  physiologist  will  tell  you,  is  very  much  more  injurious  than 
when  they  are  taken  with  food.  Now,  in  all  these  countries  of  Europe, 
intemperance  exists  as  a  social  evil  mainly  among  the  poor  classes.  In 
society,  there  is  a  great  distinction  between  the  favored  and  unfavored  classes, 
the  higher  and  lower ;  and  the  great  majority  of  the  masses  in  Europe,  are 
born  to  a  condition  of  hopeless  toil.  The  great  trouble  is,  the  great  majority 
cannot  get  a  good  and  sufficient  supply  of  nutritious  food.  Of  course,  that  is 
an  evil  that  we  do  not  have  to  contend  with  here.  But  our  country  is  almost  the 
only  country  where  intemperance  reaches  to  the  favored  classes ;  while  in 
Europe,  it  is  very  unusual  for  the  clergyman,  the  doctor,  the  lawyer  or  the 
banker  or  the  better  classes  of  the  society  of  the  different  countries  to  be  sub- 
ject to  the  evils  of  intemperance.  That  is  not  unusual  here.  It  is  partly 
owing  to  the  habits  of  the  people  generally,  and  the  highly  oxygenated  social 
atmosphere  in  which  we  live.  Those  who  have  anything  to  do,  are  apt  to  have 
too  much  to  do.  The  habit  of  taking  liquor  to  such  an  extent,  arises  from  the 
same  tendency ;  while  on  the  other  hand,  drunkenness  is  almost  unknown  in 
Europe  among  the  higher  classes.  I  will  take  Scotland,  where  the  religion  is  a 
most  rigorous  Calvinism,  and  where  what  we  might  call  a  Puritan  severity  is 
observed,  and  where  Sundays  are  observed  with  the  utmost  strictness ;  and  I 
undertake  to  say,  that  the  clergy  of  the  Scotch  church,  men  austerely  virtu- 
ous, arc,  as  a  general  rule,  in  the  habit  of  drinking  every  day  of  either  malt 
liquor  or  wine,  or  whiskey  and  water.  The  amount  of  liquor  consumed  in 
Scotland,  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  individuals,  is  probably  greater  than 
in  any  other  country  of  Europe.  But  the  evils  of  intemperance  in  Scotland, 
are  confined  almost  entirely  to  the  lower  classes.  In  France,  Italy,  and  Ger- 
many, the  difficulty  with  the  poor  people  is  that  of  want  of  proper  food.  The 
food  is  insufficient  in  quantity,  and  still  more  in  quality.  It  is  the  habit  with 
some  of  the  laboring  classes  of  Paris,  to  begin  the  day  with  a  petit  verre,  or 
small  glass  of  brandy.  It  is  because  they  cannot  get  meat,  and  because  the 
brandy  supplies  an  artificial  nervous  energy  which  carries  them  through  the 
day.  But,  as  Prof.  Liebig  says,  it  draws  upon  the  nervous  system.  I  have 
remarked,  elsewhere,  that  the  people  of  Italy  drink  more  than  is  good  for 
them  ;  and  it  is  because  they  cannot  get  good  meat.  Their  food  consists  of 
vegetables  and  bread,  and  that  which  fills  up  and  distends,  but  which  do  not 
constitute  that  food  which  gives  the  most  of  nervous  energy.  Let  us  suppose 


52  APPENDIX. 

that  during  the  winter  season  (and  oftentimes  the  winters  in  Italy  are  not  by 
any  means  tropical,)  a  person^should  live  on  vegetables  and  bread  only,  and 
it  will  be  found  that  there  is  an  undeniable  longing  for  something  which  shall 
give  a  nervous  energy  to  the  system.  What  is  wanted  is  meat.  If  you  give 
the  man  meat  he  will  not  want  anything  else.  It  would  be  a  great 
improvement  upon  the  condition  of  the  poor  in  Europe,  if  they  would 
eat  more  meat  and  drink  less  wine.  So  long  as  they  cannot  get  meat,  they 
will  have  wine.  But  there  is  this  peculiarity,  however ;  you  will  hardly  ever 
see  a  man  intoxicated.  And  it  is  on  the  ground  of  sanitary  advantages  that  I 
should  urge  a  change  in  the  drinking  of  little  by  little  in  order  to  supply  ner- 
vous energy.  I  never  saw  but  one  man  drunk  in  Italy ;  that  was  on  the  Lago 
Maggiore. 

Q.  Have  you  had  occasion  to  consider  how  far  legislative  action  in  this 
country,  is  capable  of  controlling  the  American  evil  to  which  you  allude  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  do  not  profess  to  have  had  any  peculiar  opportunities  for 
observation ;  nor  is  my  opinion  of  any  special  weight  upon  that  subject.  I 
agree  entirely  with  my  friend,  Mr.  Spooner,  and  those  who  think  as  he  does, 
as  to  the  great  evil  of  intemperance ;  and  I  have  a  very  great  desire  for  the 
suppression  of  it.  But,  from  my  own  observation  in  this  community  in  which 
I  live,  it  seems  to  me  that  the  attempt  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor  is  an 
entire  failure,  and  that  it  prckluces  some  very  distinct  evils.  I  think  it  is  a 
very  great  evil  having  a  law  on  the  statute-book  that  cannot  be  enforced ; 
because  it  confounds  the  moral  distinctions  in  the  minds  of  the  people ;  and 
because  the  habit  of  seeing  a  certain  law  neglected  and  set  at  naught,  induces 
a  moral  habit  which  is  not  conducive  to  the  enforcement  of  laws  which  ought 
to  be  enforced.  Now,  I  will  illustrate  in  another  way.  I  have  the  honor  at 
this  moment,  to  hold  an  office  under  the  United  States.  It  is  my  duty  to 
enforce  the  revenue  and  custom  laws  of  our  government.  You  can  have  no 
notion  of  the  difficulties  which  are  to  be  found  in  enforcing  the  laws  which 
have  grown  up,  some  satisfactory  and  some  unsatisfactory  to  the  community. 
And  it  is  because  of  the  difficulty  and  almost  impossibility  in  a  country  like 
ours,  under  free  institutions,  and  where  individual  freedom  is  so  much  and  so 
justly  valued,  of  applying  the  rule  of  a  most  rigid  supervision  and  what  you 
may  call  tyrannical  inspection.  Take  the  article  of  whiskey,  for  instance. 
There  is  a  tax  of  two  dollars  per  gallon  on  whiskey,  which  (with  great  defer- 
ence to  our  legislators,)  I  pronounce  a  most  unwise  and  injudicious  law. 
And  why  ?  Because  ydu  have  a  tax  much  greater  than  the  value  of  the 
article.  You  have  an  immense  temptation  to  everybody  to  evade  the  tax. 
And  the  consequence  is  that  not  more  than  one-third  of  the  whiskey  manu- 
factured in  the  country  at  this  moment  pays  a  duty.  I  should  say  that  it  was 
even  less  than  that,  or  not  more  than  one-fourth.  And  you  can  buy  what  is 
called  whiskey  for  from  $1.40  to  $1.50  in  New  York,  the  tax  being  at  the 
same  time  $2.00.  Every  day  whiskey  is  brought  from  New  York  to  Boston 
which  has  not  paid  a  tax.  Our  detectives  are  after  it,  but  the  law  cannot  be 
enforced.  That  is  my  illustration  of  the  evil  of  having  a  law  upon  the  stat> 
ute-book  which  cannot  be  enforced.  If  there  was  a  tax  of  seventy-five  cents, 
I  believe  the  government  would  get  more  revenue  from  it,  and  there  would 
not  be  the  constant  temptation  to  evasion.  Another  thing  which  is  noticeable 


APPENDIX.  53 

is  the  quality  of  this  whiskey ;  it  is  detestable.  The  deleterious  stuff  that  is 
brought  here  under  the  name  and  aspect  and  guise  of  whiskey,  is  injurious 
to  health  and  unsafe.  And  it  is,  according  to  my  idea,  the  direct  result  of 
having  legislation  that  cannot  be  enforced. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  quality  of  whiskey  is 
worse  now  than  formerly  ? 

A.  I  am  told  so;  that  is  what  I  understand  from  the  officers  who  are 
charged  with  enforcing  the  law. 

Q.  "Was  it  not  generally  understood  that  it  was  unsurpassably  bad  fifteen 
years  ago,  and  has  been  ever  since  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  as  to  that.  I  only  speak  now  from  my  present  point  of 
observation.  What  they  say  of  this  illicit  whiskey  is  that  it  is  exceedingly 
bad. 

Q.     If  you  were  here  under  oath,  would  you  say  that  it  was  bad  ? 

A.    I  could  not  say  that,  because  it  does  not  come  under  my  own  experience. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  ask  you  whether,  in  relation  to  your  testimony  touching 
the  use  of  brandy,  wines,  ale,  beer,  and  the  like,  partly  because  the  poor  lack 
food,  you  mean  to  be  understood  as  saying  that  the  liquors  are  cheaper  than 
food? 

A.     Cheaper  than  meat. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  nutrition  and  support  obtained  from  the 
liquor  is  cheaper  than  the  same  amount  of  nutriment  would  be  if  the  money 
were  expended  in  meat  ? 

A.  Cheaper  than  as  expended  in  meat.  I  said  distinctly  that  they  obtain, 
among  the  classes  that  I  spoke  of,  a  vegetable  and  farinaceous  food,  but  that 
it  was  meat  which  was  required  to  supply  nervous  energy. 

Q.  I  judged  from  the  general  tone  of  your  testimony  that  drunkenness  is 
not  very  prevalent  in  the  countries  of  Europe.  Drunkenness  is  to  be  found 
in  every  country  in  Europe.  You  refer  to  Scotland ;  I  think  you  do  no 
injustice  when  you  say  that  the  poor  of  Scotland  are  extremely  intemperate  ? 

A .    I  cannot  say  from  my  own  observation  that  it  is  so,  but  I  think  it  is  so. 

Q.  Do  you  regard  the  regulations  in  the  warmer  countries  such  as  to  lead 
you  to  expect  any  change  under  the  system  you  propose  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  perhaps  not. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  use  of  liquors  as  drams,  and  the  use  of  those  liquors 
with  food.  From  what  point  of  view  do  you  express  an  opinion  on  that 
subject. 

A .     From  a  sanitary  point. 

Q.     From  observation  and  experience  ? 

A.     From  reading,  not  experience ;  I  am  not  a  physician. 

Q.     What  do  you  infer  from  your  experience  ? 

A.    I  am  not  in  the  habit  of  dram-drinking ;  I  cannot  say. 

Q.    You  distinguish  between  dram-drinking  and  drinking  with  food  ? 

A.  I  distinguish  between  the  use  of  wines  or  liquors  at  dinner  with  food, 
and  drinking  them  upon  an  empty  stomach. 

Q.     You  infer  that  the  injury  is  greater  in  one  case  than  the  other  ? 

A.  I  do  not  speak  from  experience;  but  I  take  it,  that  anybody  who  has 
read  physiology,  or  has  the  slightest  knowledge  of  the  structure  of  the  human 


54  APPENDIX. 

frame,  knows  that  liquor  taken  alone  into  the  stomach  has  more  injury  than 
•when  taken  with  food. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  favored  classes  in  other  countries,  and  of  the  poorer 
classes  as  being  the  victims  of  intemperance.  What  relation  do  the  favored 
classes  throughout  Great  Britain  bear  to  the  poor?  What  proportion  of  the 
community  falls  under  the  deleterious  influence  of  intemperance  ? 

A.  A  large  proportion  fall  under  the  head  of  lower  or  less  favored  classes, 
unquestionably ;  the  percentage  I  cannot  say. 

Q.     Should  you  say  nine-tenth    per  cent.  ? 

A.     I  should  think  not. 

Q.     Can  you  give  the  number  of  landholders  in  England  and  Scotland  ? 

A.  I  am  unable  to  give  the  precise  number.  I  think  that  five  persons 
own  one-fifth  of  the  landed  property  of  Scotland.  •  It  is  perfectly  well  under- 
stood that  the  land  in  Great  Britain  is  cultivated  by  men  who  do  not  own 
the  soil ;  and  that  the  condition  of  the  poor  in  Great  Britain  and  Europe 
may  be  considered  one  of  hopeless  poverty. 

Q.  As  to  the  state  of  temperance  throughout  the  great  cities  of  England, 
what  is  your  judgment? 

A.  I  could  not  say  positively,  but  if  you  ask  me  relatively,  I  should  say 
that  there  had  been  a  decided  improvement  since  the  beginning  of  this 
century. 

Q.     From  what  causes  ? 

A.  From  the  increased  amount  of  popular  reading,  the  cultivation  of  a 
taste  for  cheap  amusements,  and  a  cultivation  of  a  taste  in  art,  etc.  If  you 
read  the  life  of  Lord  Jeffrey,  of  Lord  Coburn,  and  of  Sir  Walter  Scott,  you 
will  see  the  great  amount  of  drinking  existing  at  the  beginning  of  this  cen- 
tury. And  if  you  read  a  work  written  by  a  Mr.  Shaw,  you  will  find  some 
curious  statistics  in  reference  to  the  amount  of  wine  drank  now  at  the 
various  entertainments,  dinners,  etc.  He  says  that  two  or  three  times  as 
much  wine  used  to  be  drank  half  a  century  ago  as  there  is  now.  The  light 
wines  of  Germany  are  now  more  used.  I  was  in  Europe  in  1848,  and  again 
in  1859,  and  I  have  thought  that  there  was  less  wine  and  liquor  drank  in 
1859  than  at  the  time  of  my  former  visit.  It  may  be  a  fancy.  I  have  been 
told  that  in  former  times  it  was  common  for  gentlemen  to  be  flustered  with 
drink  at  dinner  parties,  and  such  gatherings ;  but  I  never  saw  a  man  at  a 
dinner-party  the  least  flustered. 

Q.     You  confine  that  remark  to  dinner-parties  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  And  I  never  did  see  anybody  in  Scotland  intoxicated ;  but 
I  was  there  only  three  weeks. 

Q.  You  are  aware  that  the  places  where  gin  and  whiskey,  etc.,  are  sold  in 
the  great  cities  of  Scotland  are  exceedingly  numerous,  as  also  in  England  ? 

A.     Certainly;  no  one  can  doubt  that. 

Q.  Are  you  prepared  to  say  that  the  state  of  things  is  worse  here  than  in 
those  cities  ? 

A.  I  think  you  may  say  this  :  that  among  the  laboring  classes  the  standard 
of  temperance  is  much  higher  here  than  it  is  there  ;  but  I  think  that  among 
the  educated  classes  it  is  the  reverse. 

Q.     And  yet  you  have  a  regular  system  of  licenses  there  ? 


APPENDIX.  55 

A.  I  suppose  so.  I  do  not  suppose  that  any  system  will  put  an  end  to  the 
ase  of  liquor. 

Q.     But  you  say  the  laboring  classes  get  the  worst  of  it  ? 

A.  I  should  say  that  among  the  laboring  classes  there  was  great  injury 
done.  In  our  own  country  they  have  more  means ;  and  besides,  they  have 
hope.  In  the  countries  of  Europe,  the  poorer  classes  of  laborers  have  not 
this  hope  ;  they  are  born  to  hopeless  toil,  and  they  drink  for  oblivion. 

Q.  And  you  think  that  intemperance  in  this  country  is  worse  than  it  is  in 
any  other  ? 

A.  I  should  say  so;  for  the  reason,  that  it  is  found  to  a  greater  extent 
among  the  more  favored  classes — the  higher  classes,  you  may  say,  though  that 
is  not  the  term  to  apply  in  our  own  country.  You  have  met  young  men  in 
your  own  experience,  young  men  at  college,  young  men  with  many  advan- 
tages, socially  and  pecuniarily,  who  have  become  addicted  to  and  been 
ruined  by  the  use  of  intoxicating  drinks.  I -mean  that  the  effect  is  more 
noticeable  in  our  own  country  upon  that  class, of  persons. 

Q.  Are  you  sure  that  the  difference  between  the  effects  upon  the  favored 
classes  and  upon  the  laboring  classes  would  lie  against  the  favored  classes 
more  than  upon  others  ?  Would  they  not  about  balaifte  ? 

A.  That  is  something  that  I  cannot  tell  you :  they  are  rather  imponder- 
able elements.  I  should  say,  from  my  observation,  that  there  was  no  country 
in  the  world  which  suffered  so  much  from  intemperance  as  America. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  have  given  your  observation  in  Europe  as 
to  their  wines  and  stronger  drinks.  Now,  when  we  converse  with  a  man 
about  having  prohibition  in  this  country,  he  will  say,  Why,  you-  go  into 
Europe,  and  they  drink  their  wines  there,  and  there  is  no  intoxication.  Now, 
I  want  to  ask  you,  if  such  a  wine  as  the- common  wine  of  Italy  exists  in  the 
country,  in  your  opinion  ?  Does  anybody  ever  have  it,  uninforced  by 
alcohol  ? 

A.  Oh,  yes,  sir.  I  think  there  is  very  little  difference.  Some  of  the 
wines  of  Italy  are  not  very  weak.  There  are  various  wines  which  arc  not  so 
strong  as  those  drank  at  the  table  d'hote.  And  the  German  wines  are  not  very 
weak. 

Q.     Are  you  not  satisfied  that  no  wine  comes  here  in  a  pure  state  ? 

A.  I  presume  that  wine  which  is  brought  here  is  somewhat  adulterated ; 
but  I  am  sure  that  we  can  get  the  light  wines  of  France,  which  contain  less 
of  an  intoxicating  element  than  the  wines  drank  in  a  considerable  portion 
of  Europe. 

Q.     You  spoke  of  no  intemperance  existing  ? 

A.  I  consider  that  there  is  intemperance  existing  in  some  portions  of  those 
countries  ;  but  I  mean  that  there  is  comparatively  little. 

Q.  But  it  is  pretty  difficult  for  the  traveller  to  see  everything  that  is  going 
on? 

A.     You  are  perfectly  right. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that,  in  this  cold  region,  it  is  practicable  to  bring  the 
light  wines  of  Europe  into  common  use  ? 


56  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  presume  not ;  it  is  too  expensive.  On  the  other  hand,  I  consider 
that  the  introduction  of  lager  beer  into  this  country,  especially  in  the  West, 
as  a  substitute  for  whiskey,  has  been  a  decided  improvement. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  the  common  habits  of  the  laboring  people  in  England. 
Is  there  not  a  good  deal  of  drunkenness  there  ? 

A.  To  some  extent,  I  have  no  doubt  that  among  the  laboring  population 
of  Great  Britain  there  is  a  very  considerable  amount  of  drunkenness ;  but  I 
think  it  is  very  much  less  now  than  it  was  twenty-five  or  thirty  years  ago  ; 
and  it  is  because  there  has  been  so  much  done  in  England  to  elevate  the 
condition  of  the  laboring  classes. 

Q.  Another  question.  We  came  here  on  the  petition  of  some  gentlemen 
for  a  license  law  as  a  substitute  for  the  prohibitory  law,  on  the  ground  that  it 
will  promote  temperance.  Now  you  say  that  this  prohibitory  law  is  not 
enforced  ? 

A.  I  speak  of  Boston.  I  do  not  know  anything  about  the  operation  of  it 
in  other  localities. 

Q.  Are  you  conversant  with  the  facts  as  to  its  operation  at  present,  in 
Boston  ? 

A.  As  I  said  before,  I  do  not  profess  to  have  any  particular  means  of 
observing. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  the  operation  of  this  law  in  the  country  ? 
You  have  been  invited  here  to  give  testimony  in  regard  to  this  matter.  I 
want  to  know  if  you  can  give  me  an  instance  where  a  license  ever  served  to 
restrain  the  sale  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  do  not  know  that  I  have. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  I  wish  to  ask  if  the  practice  of  selling  does  not 
exist,  according  to  your  observation,  abroad,  at  the  present  moment,  without 
a  license  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  that;  if  it  does  it  is  owing,  I  think,  to  the  excise.  It  is 
a  clandestine  manufacture,  not  a  clandestine  sale. 

Q.  Can  you  suppose  that  drunkenness  would  be  hid,  if  the  walls  of  Paris 
were  open  to  the  free  passage  of  liquor. 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  cannot  say  that.  As  I  said  before,  I  am  certainly  not  such 
an  optimist  as  to  anticipate  that,  under  any  system  whatever,  drunkenness  is  to 
be  suppressed  altogether. 

Q.    You  are  U.  S.  District- Attorney  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  have  something  to  do  with  the  prevention  of  smuggling,  do  you 
not? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  am  afraid,  however,  that  there  is  a  good  deal  of  smuggling, 
notwithstanding  the  efforts  made  to  suppress  it. 

Q.  Do  those  who  have  to  administer  the  revenue  laws  go  on  the  principle 
that  the  more  vigorous  they  are,  and  the  more  they  do  to  suppress  the  traffic, 
the  more  evasion  there  will  be  ? 

A.  I  presume  they  do  not,  sir.  It  is  my  duty  to  enforce  the  laws  of  the 
land,  as  I  am  called  upon  to  do,  without  regard  to  what  I  may  think  the 
effect  of  them  may  be. 


APPENDIX.  57 

TESTIMONY  OF  W.  M.  LATHROP. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Are  you  a  resident  of  Boston  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Are  you  one  of  the  petitioners  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  simply  wish  to  ask  your  opinion  and  belief,  in  regard  to  the  two 
systems  of  legislation  in  regard  to  the  sale  of  liquor, — the  one  a  prohibitory 
system,  and  the  other  a  system  which  restrains  and  licenses  the  sale.  Which 
would  be  the  best  for  the  moral  interests  of  the  community  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  signed  that  petition  because  I  considered  the  present  law 
as  failing  to  answer  the  end  proposed  by  it ;  and  I  think  that  a  proper  license 
law,  which  would  regulate  and  control  the  sale  in  a  measure,  would  be  better 
for  the  community. 

Q.  Have  you  any  facts  or  observations  in  regard  to  the  attempts  to 
execute  the  portion  of  the  law  which  relates  to  the  seizure  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  happened  to  know  of  a  case  the  other  day.  I  have  taken  no  special 
interest  in  this  matter,  and  have  had  nothing  to  do  about  it.  The  case  I 
allude  to,  was  one  where  a  man  came  to  our  office  and  wanted  to  get  an 
insurance  upon  a  stock  of  liquors  which  he  had  stored  the  next  door  to  his 
place  of  business ;  and  the  reason  he  gave  was  that  he  apprehended  a  visit 
from  the  State  Constable,  and  that  he  wanted  to  keep  only  a  small  stock  on 
hand,  and  so  replenish  from  his  stock  in  the  next  building. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  as  to  the  general  sentiment  upon  the  qestion  of 
a  license  law  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  public  sentiment  is  decidedly  in  favor  of  a  license  law, 
so  far  as  I  know. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     What  public  sentiment  do  you  speak  of? 

A.  I  speak  of  the  opinions  of  the  people  with  whom  I  come  in  contact 
daily. 

Q.    Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 

A.    It  is  in  State  Street. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  speak  of  a  proper  license  system.  Will 
you  be  so  good  as  to  give  what  you  consider  a  proper  system  ? 

A.  I  have  not  digested  that  matter.  I  think  that  a  license  law  that  should 
authorize  only  a  limited  number  of  persons  to  sell  would  have  a  beneficial 
effect. 

Q.  Have  you  had  opportunities  of  judging  of  the  operation  of  the  liquor 
laws  ?  Has  it  been  a  matter  of  particular  observation  to  with  you  ? 

A.  I  resided  in  New  York  some  years,  and  I  was  connected  with  a  tem- 
perance society  there,  and  in  that  way  came  to  know  something  about  the 
operation  of  the  law  and  the  condition  of  things  at  that  time. 

Q.     Did  they  have  a  license  law  there  at  that  time  ? 

A.  We  had  a  license  system  there,  but  anybody  that  wanted  a  license,  and 
would  pay  ten  dollars,  could  have  one.  That  was  not  such  a  law  as  I  should 
wish  to  have. 

Q.    What  limit  would  you  have  to  the  granting  of  licenses  ? 

A.    I  would  have  high  prices  for  licenses. 

8 


58  APPENDIX. 

Q.     How  many  should  you  think  proper  for  Boston  ? 

•A.  I  am  not  prepared  to  say  at  all.  I  think  the  principal  hotels  should 
have  a  license ;  and  beyond  that  I  think  but  few  would  be  required. 

Q.     Would  you  not  license  anybody  to  sell  to  families  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  I  should. 

Q.     Who  would  you  license  ? 

A.    If  I  was  to  mention  any  person  I  should  mention  yourself. 

Q.  There  are  a  good  many  grocers  who  are  carrying  on  a  respectable 
business ;  would  you  not  license  them  ? 

A.     That  would  be  making  it  too  common. 

Q.  There  are  some  two  hundred  apothecaries,  some  of  them  conscientious 
men.  Would  you  not  license  every  one  of  them  ? 

A.     Well,  I  think  they  ought  to  be  licensed. 

Q.     You  would  not  license  respectable  grocers  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say,  sir.  I  should  want  to  look  over  the  city  and  examine  the 
subject  more  than  I  have,  before  I  could  say  as  to  that. 

Q.     You  have  lived  in  New  York  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  not  know  that  every  law  they  have  had  there  has  been  a . 
failure,  and  that  it  has  always  been  a  license  law  ? 

A .  When  I  was  in  New  York,  I  was  connected  with  a  temperance  society 
there ;  and  when  I  was  an  officer  I  know  that  we  did  not  consider  the  law  of 
much  consequence.  But  a  considerable  inroad  was  made  upon  intemperance 
during  the  few  years  that  that  society  was  in  operation ;  and  I  think  a  good 
impression  was  made.  That  society  was  broken  up  by  the  Washingtonians 
coming  in  ;  and  the  societies,  I  believe,  have  not  done  much  since  then. 

Q.  Did  you  not  know  that  in  the  city  of  Boston,  and  in  every  city,  wher- 
ever they  have  had  a  license  system,  they  always  licensed  so  many  that  the 
law  was  inoperative  to  any  great  extent,  and  everybody  was  permitted  to  sell 
without  a  license  who  pleased  ? 

A.  I  was  not  familiar  with  Boston  at  that  time,  and  I  have  not  any  opinion 
on  the  subject. 

Q.  Have  you  continued  your  labors  in  Boston  since  you  came  from  New 
York  ? 

A.  I  have  not  come  in  contact  with  any  temperance  men  in  society  since 
then.  I-  have  not  been  in  favor  of  the  system  of  legislation  here,  and  have 
;not  thought  it  calculated  to  promote  the  cause. 

Q.     Would  you  have  a  system  which  permitted  everybody  to  sell  ? 

A.     We  all  understand,  and  the  law  understands,  that  alcohol  is  a  necessity. 

Q.     For  what? 

A.  For  medicine  and  for  mechanical  purposes.  We  admit  it  by  the  law, 
:and  therefore  the  sale  is  permitted ;  but,  if  it  be  confined  to  the  purposes 
required  by  the  law,  I  for  one  should  be  perfectly  satisfied. 

Q.  If  you  felt  that  this  prohibitory  law,  as  it  is  at  present,  would  accomplish 
'the  results  which  you  desire,  you  would  give  it  your  support,  would  you  not  ? 

A.    I  do  not  see  in  it  any  tendency  to  accomplish  those  results. 


APPENDIX.  59 

TESTIMONY  OF  EX-JUDGE  HENRY  W.  BISHOP. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Will  you  state  what  experience  you  have  had  with 
the  laws  relating  to  the  sale  of  liquor  ? 

A .  My  experience,  sir,  has  been  a  very  brief  one  indeed,  and  confined  mainly 
to  a  very  few  subjects.  When  this  prohibitory  law  was  passed,  I  was  in  favor  of 
it,  though  I  doubted  very  much  whether  it  would  answer  all  the  purposes  that 
the  friends  and  advocates  of  it  desired.  When  indictments  were  found  under 
it,  I  took  pains  to  notice  the  number  of  indictments,  because  I  was  anxious  to 
know  something  of  the  sale  of  liquor  which  was  going  on.  And  from  time  to 
time,  for  a  space  of  about  six  years,  I  noticed  that  the  indictments  at  the  sev- 
eral terms  of  court  that  I  held,  were  increasing ;  and  when  I  left  the  bench, 
the  number  of  indictments  was  very  much  greater  than  at  the  time  the  law 
was  put  first  in  force.  I  came  to  the  conclusion,  therefore,  that  this  law  was 
not  going  to  subserve  the  purposes  desired  by  the  advocates  of  it,  and  I 
regarded  it  as  unsatisfactory.  Another  thing  I  noticed  (and  I  do  not  know 
but  that  would  apply  to  every  law  in  relation  to  the  sale  of  liquors,)  was,'  that 
there  was  a  great  deal  of  perjury  committed;  and  another  thing  was,  that 
upon  examination  of  the  liquors  that  were  seized,  it  was  found  that  there  was 
a  great  deal  of  bad  chemistry  there.  It  is  a  very  singular  fact.  My  attention 
was  called  to  it  particularly,  that  even  gentlemen  of  respectability,  when 
called  upon  to  testify  in  relation  to  the  sale  of  liquor  by  their  friends,  or  in 
relation  to  keeping  public  houses,  they  would  conceal ;  and  there  was  a  strong 
tendency,  a  very  strong  tendency  indeed,  to  conceal  and  not  disclose  the 
truth :  in  other  words,  it  afforded  opportunity  for  committing,  if  it  did  not 
lead  to  the  commission  of  the  crime  of  perjury. 

Q.     You  have  been  at  the  bar  a  great  many  years  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  May  I  ask  you  if  you  have  an  opinion  as  a  member  of  the  bar  and  as  a 
member  of  the  court,  that  the  enforcement  of  the  law  would  check  the  sale  of 
liquor  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  believe  that,  as  long  as  men  have  nerves,  they  will  require 
narcotics  or  stimulants,  and  that  it  will  be  very  difficult  to  have  perfect  tem- 
perance, without  tearing  the  nerves  all  out :  and  I  judge  in  this  way  in  rela- 
tion to  that ;  —  that  ever  since  the  world  was,  men  have  got  drunk ;  and  that 
as  long  as  it  lasts  they  will  get  drunk,  although  it  is  to  be  very  much  deplored. 

Q.  From  your  experience  in  the  position  you  have  occupied,  what  has 
been  your  opinion  as  to  practicability  of  so  enforcing  this  law  as  to  check 
materially  the  sale  and  use  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  think  it  will  be  very  difficult  indeed  to  enforce  it.  I  think  you  will 
find  great  difficulty  in  enforcing  this  law,  as  long  as  ex-governors,  ex- 
chancellors  and  ex-judges,  and  all  the  ex's  are  in  the  habit  of  drinking  and 
purchasing  liquor,  to  make  the  community  believe  as  a  mass,  that  it  is  a  sin 
to  sell  it  or  drink  it. 

Q.  As  a  legal,  judicial  question,  do  you  think  the  subject  of  restraining  by 
law  these  gentlemen  from  the  use  of  liquor  is  a  legitimate  subject  of 
legislation  ? 

A .  Well,  sir,  it  would  rather  interfere  with  the  judgment  of  men  gen- 
erally. With  regard  to  any  dietetic  or  sanitary  measures,  you  must  instruct 


60  APPENDIX. 

nien  differently.  It  may  be  a  very  grave  mistake  that  men  were  so  con- 
structed. I  have  no  doubt  that  by  great  exertion,  all  this  propensity  could  be 
overcome  to  some  extent,  or  made  very  much  better. 

Q.  From  the  action  of  courts  and  the  hearing  of  the  testimony  of  wit- 
nesses, what  opinion  would  they  give  you  as  to  the  operation  of  this  kind  of 
legislation  ?  Is  it  not  in  accordance  with  the  opinion  of  the  courts  generally, 
that  the  prohibitory  law  cannot  be  executed  fully  ? 

A.  Excuse. me,  sir,  from  answering  that  question,  for  really,  my  opinion 
would  be  of  very  little  value. 

Q  So  far  as  criminal  law  is  concerned,  does  it  not,  if  it  is  disregarded  or 
unobserved,  have  an  effect  upon  the  general  subject  of  respect  for  law  ?  A 
law  not  enforced,  is  not  that  injurious  upon  all  other  laws  ? 

A.  It  affects  all  the  other  laws,  and  destroys  the  respect  for  the 'other 
laws,  and  they  are  yielded  to  reluctantly. 

Q.  Again,  I  would  ask  you,  supposing  that  the  courts  of  the  Common- 
wealth were  employed  all  the  time,  and  convicted  a  man  every  day,  what 
effect  that  would  have  upon  a  traffic  so  extensive  as  this  which  they  tell  of 
having  reached  the  amount  of  a  hundred  thousand  dollars  a  day  ? 

A.     I  think,  sir,  they  would  kick. 

Q.     Do  you  believe  it  practicable,  sir  ? 

A .  My  opinion  about  it  is  that  it  is  not  practicable.  I  have  noticed  this  : 
that  in  some  localities  the  sale  has  been  suppressed  for  a  season,  but  only  to 
break  out  again,  and  break  out  more  violently.  I  know  of  two  or  three 
little  villages  in  my  own  vicinity  where  the  sale  was  suspended,  but  where  it 
is  carried  on  clandestinely,  I  have  no  doubt. 

Q.  Are  you  able  to  give  an  opinion  from  your  own  observation  as  to  the 
extent  of  drinking  usages  in  Berkshire  County  prior  to  this  law  and  at  the 
present  time  ? 

A.  My  opinion  is  that  in  some  places  it  is  suppressed  and  that  in  others  it 
is  not ;  and  generally  I  do  not  think  that  the  law  has  been  of  any  great 
benefit. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  observed  in  regard  to  where  it  is  not  sold  and  where  it 
is  brought  into  town  from  other  places  ? 

A .     I  do  not  know  as  to  that,  sir. 

Q.  I  ask  your  opinion  as  a  lawyer  and  a  judge  as  to  this  feature  :  the 
law  makes  the  sale  of  a  glass  of  liquor  a  crime,  and  imposes  a  fine  and  impris- 
onment ;  but  the  man  who  drinks  is  not  found  guilty  of  crime,  provided  he 
does  not  drink  enough  to  get  drunk.  What  is  your  judgment  in  regard  to 
such  a  law  ? 

A.    I  do  not  think  it  creates  any  great  respect  for  the  law  itself. 

Q.     Will  you  tell  me  why  ? 

A.  I  will  illustrate  that  point  by  an  anecdote.  While  I  was  in  the  courts, 
a  very  shrewd  man  came  to  me  one  day  and  asked  me  what  was  the  penalty 
for  stealing  a  glass  of  liquor.  I  informed  him  that  it  was  twenty  dollars  fine 
and  costs.  He  then  asked  me  what  was  the  penalty  for  selling  a  glass  of  liquor. 
I  told  him  that  penalty  was  a  hundred  dollars  fine  and  costs,  and  he  then 
asked  me  whether  it  was  worse  to  sell  a  glass  of  liquor  than  it  was  to  steal  it. 
I  simply  give  this  instance  to  illustrate  my  views  upon  this  point. 


APPENDIX.  61 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  speak  of  the  non-enforcement  of  the  law  as 
injurious  ? 

A.     Well,  sir,  it  certainly  is,  sir. 

Q.  If  you  have  a  false  principle,  which  is  conceded  to  be  such,  enacted 
into  a  law,  what  would  be  the  effect  of  such  a  law  ? 

A.  There  would  be  no  respect  for  such  a  law  as  that,  and  there  ought  not 
to  be. 

Q.  Do  you  claim  that  the  protection  of  the  sale  of  alcoholic  liquors  as 
beverages  is  for  the  public  good  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  I  clearly  understand  you,  sir. 

Q.  I  take  it  that  a  license  law  is  a  protected  sale  of  liquor  :  the  question 
now  is,  whether  you  think  the  sale  of  liquors  is  requisite  to  the  public  good  ?. 

A.  I  think,  sir,  that  the  sale  of  liquors  should  be  circumscribed  undoubt- 
edly. I  would  not  give,  by  any  means,  all  the  persons  in  the  community  the 
right  to  traffic  in  it,  as  in  oats,  cheese  and  butter. 

Q.     Do  you  regard  the  sale  of  liquors  as  requisite  to  the  public  good  ? 

A.    I  confess  I  cannot  understand  what  you  mean  by  protected  sale. 

Q.  Protected  in  the  sale  of  liquors  means  that  the  arm  of  the  State  is 
thrown  around  the  trafficker,  so  that  he  shall  not  be  harmed.  Now  is  the  pro- 
tected sale  of  liquors  as  a  beverage  requisite  to  the  public  good  ? 

A.     I  think  that  a  regulated  sale  of  liquors  is  for  the  public  good. 

Q.  On  which  side  would  you  have  the  power  of  the  State ;  on  the 
restricted  side,  or  on  the  protective  side  ? 

A.  You  undoubtedly  have  your  own  idea  distinctly  in  your  own  mind, 
but  I  frankly  confess  that  I  do  not  understand  you. 

Q.  A  law  that  restricts  many  from  selling  and  protects  some,  or  a  law 
which  prohibits  the  sale  altogether — on  which  side  does  the  public  good  lie  ? 

A.  It  lies,  as  all  public  good  lies,  in  the  protection.  I  would  protect  a 
person  against  any  penalty  for  making  sales  of  liquor  if  he  is  licensed,  and  if 
he  brings  himself  within  the  conditions  of  the  license. 

Q.  You  mean  to  say  that  the  public  good  requires  protection  by  law  of 
men  engaged  in  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquor  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  you  say  I  do.  The  Committee  will  understand  me.  I  do 
not  wish  to  avoid  the  question,  but,  not  being  familiar  with  metaphysical 
philosophy,  as  it  is  now  more  than  fifty  years  since  I  pursued  those  studies  at 
all,  I  confess  I  am  not  able  to  comprehend  your  idea  of  a  protected  sale. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)  On  what  ground  did  you  sign  this  petition  for  a 
license  law  ? 

A.     On  the  ground  that  a  license  law  would  promote  temperance. 

Q.  Now  I  understood  you  to  say  that  in  the  country  in  some  places  this 
law  has  done  some  good  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  I  have  noticed  it. 

Q.     Is  it  not  considerable  ? 

A.     I  have  no  doubt  that  it  is  in  many  cases. 

Q.  Your  memory  runs  back  to  the  day  when  we  had  a  license  law ;  do 
you  recollect  that  it  restrained  the  sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect  that  it  ever  did.  There  were  a  great  many  sales 
under  that  law  by  those  who  were  not  licensed. 


62  APPENDIX. 

Q.  There  were  so  many  licensed  and  so  many  unlicensed  that  it  was  no 
object  to  have  a  license,  was  it  not  ? 

A.  There  were  a  great  many  licensed.  Up  to  the  time  that  this  law  was 
passed  there  were  licenses  scattered  all  around. 

Q.     Nobody  was  put  to  trouble  when  they  were  licensed,  were  they  ? 

A.     No,  sir ;  I  do  not  know  that  they  were. 

Q.     What  kind  of  a  license  law  should  you  recommend  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  what  system  L would  adopt  in  relation  to  the  license 
law. 

Q.  Did  there  not  use  to  be  a  good  many  sales  by  persons  who  had  no 
licenses  ? 

A.  They  have  sold  without  licenses  ever  since  I  have  know  anything 
about  business  ;  there  have  been  sales  without  license,  and  sales  in  the  face  of 
prohibition.  I  do  not  know  that  the  license  law  operated  much  different 
from  this  law  in  that  respect  ? 

Q.  You  say  it  is  difficult  to  enforce  the  law,  because  men  in  official  posi- 
tions drink ;  have  you  ever  known  of  any  great  reforms  which  have  been 
started  by  ex-judges  and  ex-chancellors  ;  have  they  not  always  been  started 
from  a  class  of  society  loAver  doAvn  in  the  social  scale,  and  have  they  not  rode 
right  over  these  cx-oflicials  ? 

A.     I  believe  that  is  generally  the  case,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  I  would  ask  if  you  mean  to  express  an  opinion 
that  the  application  of  the  prohibitory  principle  tends  to  increase  the  traffic 
and  thereby  increase  the  number  of  indictments  ? 

A.     I  did  not  say  that,  sir.     I  do  not  say  that  it  has  increased  the  traffic. 

Q.     "Why  do  you  mention  the  greater  number  of  indictments  ? 

A.  To  show  that  the  effects  arc  not  to  suppress  the  traffic.  I  do  not  say 
that  the  traffic  has  increased,  for  that  is  a  point  that  I  do  not  know.  I 
merely  state  this  fact,  and  it  is  a  fact  which  I  have  noticed  particularly,  that 
the  indictments  did  not  suppress  the  traffic  ? 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  the  conviction  of  the  man  whom  you  sentenced 
tended  to  increase  or  suppress*  the  traffic  ? 

A.  Well,  I  do  not  think  it  had  much  effect  upon  that  one  way  or  the 
other. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  administration  of  the  revenue  laws  in  this  Com- 
monwealth has  any  effect  upon  those  who  pay  taxes  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  anything  of  the  revenue  laws,  except  as  they  reach  me 
personally. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  it  is  proper  to  place  in  the  jury-box  a  man  who  is 
himself  a  known  violator  of  the  same  criminal  law  for  which  he  is  sitting  in 
judgment  upon  another  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  should  want  to  reflect  a  little  upon  that  subject.  I  have 
known  individuals  of  that  character  who  were  just  as  severe  and  just  as 
strongly  inclined  to  enforce  the  law  as  others  are.  I  can  recollect  now  par- 
ticularly one  time  when  I  was  holding  court  (it  was  in  Essex  County,)  that 
I  was  told  that  I  should  not  get  a  conviction  under  the  law,  because  two  or 
three  men  on  the  jury  sold  liquor  themselves.  But  I  found  afterwards  that 
they  were  in  favor  of  enforcing  the  law. 


APPENDIX.  63 

Q.  AS  a  principle  you  would  not  have  counterfeiters  upon  the,  jury  for 
the  trial  of  a  person  accused  of  counterfeiting  ? 

A.     No,  sir  ;  certainly  not. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Is  there  any  difficulty  in  Berkshire  County  in  any- 
body's buying  all  the  liquor  that  they  want  ? 

A.  I  think  there  may  be  some  little  difficulty  about  it,  but  this  difficulty 
is  overcome. 

Q.     People  obtain  all  they  want  ? 

A.     They  do. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  E.  B.  GILLETTE. 

.  Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Are  you  district-attorney  of  the  Western 
District  ? 

A.     I  am. 

Q.  I  desire  you  to  state  to  the  Committee  any  result  of  your  professional 
or  official  experience  at  which  you  have  arrived  in  the  execution  of  the 
present  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  My  views  may  be  a  little  unsettled,  because  my  experience  has  been 
quite  various,  and  especially  so  in  the  county  of  Hampden.  I  am  prosecuting 
officer  in  Berkshire  and  Hampden  Counties.  At  the  last  term  of  the  court 
in  Hampden  County,  there  were  some  one  hundred  indictments  returned,  a 
large  majority  of  which  were  against  liquor-sellers.  I  was  informed  before  I 
commenced  the  trials  before  the  traverse  juries,  that  there  was  not  only  a 
liquor-seller  upon  the  jury,  but  one  whom  I  had  indicted  at  that  term.  I 
was  also  informed  that  I  should  secure  no  convictions  before  that  jury,  by 
parties  whom  I  thought  to  be  well  instructed  in  the  matter. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  have  you  formed  any  opinion  at  any  time,  and 
Lave  you  any  opinion  now,  touching  the  practical  question  of  executing 
the  law  as  it  now  stands  ?  I  do  not  mean  executing  the  men,  but  as  to 
executing  the  law  so  as  to  accomplish  a  suppression  of  the  traffic  ? 

A.  I  think  if  the  jury  law  was  changed,  giving  the  Commonwealth  the 
right  of  challenge  as  well  as  the  defendant,  I  should  find  no  difficulty  in 
executing  the  law  against  rum-sellers  in  my  district. 

Q.     That  is,  you  would  have  no  difficulty  in  convicting  the  men  ? 

A.    No  difficulty  at  all. 

Q.  Now,  suppose  you  had  a  machine  that  would  convict  the  men,  would 
that  fulfil  the  purpose  of  the  law  on  temperance  principles  ? 

A.  I  think  that  temperance  men,  acting  on  temperance  principles,  stand 
aloof  from  this  machine,  not  willing  that  it  should  do  the  work.  I  do  not 
think  any  moral  work  can  be  done  by  any  piece  of  machinery ;  but  I  think 
that,  as  an  auxiliary,  it  is  very  effective. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  or  known  of  many  places  where  the  traffic  had  been 
suppressed  permanently  and  not  spasmodically  ? 

A.  In  the  county  of  Berkshire,  I  think,  there  are  some  towns  where  the 
traffic  is  pretty  thoroughly  suppressed.  In  the  county  of  Hampden,  I  cannot 
recall  now  any  town  where  it  is  suppressed.  In  my  own  town,  to-day,  (West- 
field,)  there  is  less  intoxicating  liquor  sold  than  there  has  been  for  a  number 
of  years.  But  there  it  has  been  done  by  a  force  entirely  outside  of  any 


64  APPENDIX. 

law.  There  is  an  organization  there  called  the  Good  Templars.  They  just 
go  and  pick  out  all  the  customers  from  the  shops ;  and  they  are  shutting  up 
their  shops,  as  they  are  running  every  day  at  a  loss,  because  their  cus- 
tomers have  been  taken  away  by  this  temperance  organization.  So  that 
there  I  do  not  think  there  is  any  very  strong  opinion  expressed  at  present 
either  for  or  against  the  prohibitory  law,  because  they  feel  that  the  work 
is  pretty  effectually  done  by  the  organization. 

Q.  Then,  in  your  town,  so  far  as  4here  is  any  success,  it  is  due  directly  to 
moral  influences,  and  not  to  law  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     I  understand  that  applies  to  your  own  town  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  understand  you,  that  in  Berkshire  County  the  traffic  is  suppressed  to 
a  considerable  extent  ? 

A.  At  the  last  criminal  term,  there  was  quite  a  number  of  indictments 
found  against  rum-sellers.  In  almost  every  instance  they  came  in,  paid  their 
fines  and  costs,  and  recognized  that  they  would  not  violate  the  law.  They 
paid  into  the  treasury  about  twenty-five  hundred  dollars,  and  from  quite  a 
number  of  towns  there  was  quite  a  strong  expression  of  satisfaction  from  the 
temperance  people,  endorsing  the  law,  under  the  constabulary  administration 
of  it. 

Q.     Did  the  State  Constables  make  the  complaints  mostly  ? 

A.  Yes.  Before  the  constabulary  law  was  passed,  I  should  not  have  hesi- 
tated to  say  that  I  would  prefer  a  license  law  to  the  prohibitory  law.  It  was 
a  dead  letter.  I  think  the  constabulary  law  has  been  a  very  efficient  one. 

Q.  Then  I  understand  that  the  Good  Templars  have  suppressed  the  traffic 
in  Westfield  pretty  much,  but  that  in  other  towns  it  has  been  suppressed  by 
the  State  Constables  ? 

A.  I  am  not  aware  of  any  town  in  Hainpden  County  where  the  traffic  is 
suppressed. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Is  it  as  open  as  formerly  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  In  Springfield  and  my  own  town,  I  think  it  is  as  open 
as  ever.  Although  the  traffic  is  diminished,  the  shops  arc  open. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     What  has  diminished  it  ? 

A.  Many  who  have  entered  their  recognizances  in  the  courts,  have  agreed 
not  to  continue  the  traffic. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Would  the  Good  Templars  in  your  town  work  with 
the  same  good  heart,  without  a  prohibitory  law  as  with  it  ? 

A.     I  have  no  opinion  on  the  subject. 

Q.     Do  you  think  an  open  bar  would  be  conducive  to  the  public  good  ? 

A.    No.. 

Q.     Do  you  feel  clear  on  that  point  ? 

A.  I  do  not  believe  that  there  can  be  a  total  prohibition  of  the  sale  of 
liquors.  Take  a  city  like  Boston,  although  I  should  not  advocate  a  single 
open  bar  in  the  city,  at  the  same  time  I  think  in  a  city  of  this  size,  where  peo- 
ple are  coming  from  other  States  where  there  are  different  laws  and  different 
habits,  to  have  a  law  so  that  at  their  hotel,  where  they  consider  a  glass  of  wine 
as  much  a  luxury  as  pastry  or  a  desert,  I  should  question  whether  there  should 


APPENDIX.  65 

be  or  could  be  any  such  utter  prohibition  as  to  prevent  all  sale  of  it  at  the 
table  or  at  the  rooms.  But  I  certainly  should  not  vote  for  an  open  bar  in  the 
Commonwealth. 

Q.  You  mean  that,  like  other  social  vices,  it  cannot  be  utterly  eradicated ; 
yet  in  the  rural  towns  an  open  bar  would  be  adverse  to  the  public  good  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  I  think  so,  anywhere. 

Q.  And  yet  the  claim  of  a  resident  of  Westfield  to  the  luxury  of  a  glass 
would  be  as  strong  as  the  claim  of  anybody  in  Boston  ? 

A.  I  look  upon  the  drinking  of  a  single  glass  of  wine  rather  as  a  luxury 
than  as  a  vice.  There  are  many  excellent  people  who  do  not  think  the 
drinking  of  a  glass  of  wine  involves  any  moral  question. 

Q.     Would  you  extend  the  same  remark  to  a  glass  of  brandy  or  whiskey  ? 

A.  I  think 'that  would  depend  upon  the  motive.  I  think  a  person  might 
believe  that  a  glass  of  brandy  was,  to  him  at  least,  as  necessary  as  any  luxury. 
Therefore  it  would  not  be  an  immoral  act. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  the  law  as  being  dead  previous  to  the  State  Constab- 
ulary law.  What  was  the  cause  of  that  ? 

A.  I  think  its  inefficiency  was  the  result  of  there  being  no  persistent  and 
systematic  efforts  on  the  part  of  temperance  men.  In  one  place  there  would 
be  a  spasm  in  its  execution ;  for  a  single  term  or  two  terms  there  would  be 
prosecutions  in  order  to  suppress  the  traffic  in  a  single  village,  and  perhaps  a 
majority  of  the  prosecutions  would  emanate  from  a  single  village,  so  that  one 
would  think  the  traffic  was  stopped  there,  and  in  two  or  three  terms  after 
that  it  would  have  full  swing  there,  and  another  village  would  be  attended  to. 

Q.  If  those  who  were  responsible  for  the  execution  of  the  law  had  done 
what  was  necessary,,  is  there  any  reason  why  the  law  would  not  have  been  a 
living  law  as  well  as  the  constabulary  law  ? 

A.    I  see  no  reason  in  the  world. 

Q.  Then  you  speak  of  the  death  as  attached  to  the  officials  and  not  to  the 
law  itself? 

A.  I  think  the  failure  was  because  men  who  are  strong  in  their  temperance 
sentiments  were  willing  to  do  their  work  by  proxy. 

Q.     Are  you  the  prosecuting  attorney  of  your  district  ? 

A.     Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  is  the  duty  of  any  citizen  to  discharge  the  duties  of 
the  attorney? 

A.    No. 

Q.  Why  do  you  charge  upon  temperance  men  a  want  of  the  execution  of 
the  law? 

A.  I  am  not  aware  that  it  is  the  duty  of  the  district  attorney  to  prose- 
cute any  offences  except  those  which  are  brought  to  his  notice  by  the  citizens 
of  the  Commonwealth. 

Q.  But  there  are  other  police  constables  and  special  police.  Do  you 
think  it  the  duty  of  the  citizens  of  Boston  to  discharge  the  duties  charged 
upon  the  police  ? 

A.    I  think  it  is  the  duty  of  all  good  men  to  see  that  the  laws  are  enforced ; 
and  if  there  is  any  failure  on  the  part  of  any  officials  to  do  their  duty,  then  I 
think  the  force  of  public  opinion  in  any  city  or  village,  should  be  brought 
9 


66  APPENDIX. 

to  bear  on  the  officials.  I  do  not  mean  that  any  citizen  should  bring  the 
prosecutions ;  but  in  any  village  or  town  in  my  district,  I  do  not  think  there 
has  been  any  great  pressure  to  urge  the  constables  to  do  their  duty,  before 
the  State  Constabulary  were  in  action.  I  think  they  folded  their  hands,  and 
allowed  the  whole  subject  to  drift. 

Q.  Do  you  not  recognize  a  manifest  distinction  between  prosecutions  for 
theft  and  prosecutions  of  houses  of  ill-fame  ?  In  the  prosecutions  of  offences 
of  this  sort,  do  not  the  laws  necessarily  charge  the  prosecutions  upon  the 
public  officers  ?  " 

A.  Yes,  and  I  think  the  constabulary  force  has  done  the  duty  in  my  own 
district  in  a  mode  to  entitle  them  to  great  credit. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  You  say  the  law  is  not  as  well  enforced  in  Hamp- 
den  County  as  in  Berkshire  County.  From  what  cause  does  this  occur  ? 

A.  I  will  not  say  that.  I  say  that  at  the  last  term,  there  was  an  utter 
failure  in  Hampden  County,  because  there  were  men  on  the  jury  who  refused 
to  convict.  We  tried  a  number  of  cases,  and  at  last  the  foreman  informed 
the  court  that  in  no  state  of  facts  would  the  jury  convict. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  think  that  is  a  state  of  things  that  the 
law  ought  to  tolerate  ? 

A.  I  think  that  if  this  law  exists,  there  should  co-exist,  also,  a  law  by 
which  the  Commonwealth  should  have  the  right  to  challenge  as  well  as  the 
defendant  ? 

Q.  We  are  here  on  the  petition  of  certain  persons  who  favor  a  license 
law  rather  than  the  present  prohibitory  law,  because  it  will  promote  the  cause 
of  temperance.  Did  you  ever  know,  in  this  State,  or  anywhere  else,  that  a 
license  law  restrained  the  traffic  ? 

A.     I  cannot  say  that  any  such  facts  are  within  my  knowledge. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  Supposing  a  stranger  goes  into  any  of  the  towns 
in  Hampden  and  Berkshire  Counties.  Could  he  buy  liquor  there  ? 

A.  From  report,  I  should  say  that  in  Berkshire  there  were  towns  where 
it  could  not  be  bought. 

Q.     Are  these  the  larger  or  the  smaller  towns  ? 

A.     The  smaller  towns. 

Q.  Take  such  places  as  Pittsfield,  Stockbridge,  Lenox  or  Great  Barring- 
ton.  Could  a  stranger  buy  liquor  in  such  places  ? 

A.    I  think  he  could  achieve  it. 

Q.     Take  the  smaller  towns  ? 

A.  I  think  there  are  some  towns,  both  in  Hampden  and  Berkshire 
Counties,  where  it  could  not  be  obtained  without  considerable  circumlocution. 

Q.  What  is  the  proportion  of  towns  in  which  it  would  be  impossible  to 
obtain  liquor  without  circumlocution  ? 

A.     Very  small. 

Q.    In  most  places  can  liquor  be  obtained  without  difficulty  ? 

A.    I  think  it  can. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  For  how  long  a  time  have  the  efforts  to  carry  out 
the  law  been  genuine  and  persistent  ? 


APPENDIX.  67 

A.  I  think  the  efforts  on  the  part  of  the  State  Constables  have  been 
genuine. 

Q.     How  many  have  you  in  the  two  counties  ? 

A.    I  cannot  say.     In  Hampden  County  there  are  not  more  than  two. 

Q.     How  many  towns  ? 

A.  Some  twenty.  The  execution  of  the  law  depends  very  much  upon  the 
character  of  the  constable.  In  my  county  there  is  quite  a  firm-handed  gentle- 
manly person,  who,  I  think,  is  respected  by  the  rumsellers  and  the  temperance 
people ;  and  who  has  a  certain  sort  of  moral  power,  which  is  very  efficient, 
aside  from  the  dynamics  of  his  office. 

Q.  Are  there  many  cases  of  conviction  which  are  waiting  sentence,  pro- 
cured by  the  State  Constables  ? 

A.  In  Hampden  County,  the  judge  was  obliged  to  dismiss  one  of  the 
juries,  because  there  was  an  utter  failure  to  convict.  There  are  very  few 
cases  of  conviction,  but  there  was  a  large  number  of  cases  where  it  was  utterly 
impossible  to  secure  conviction ;  where  the  law  proved  utterly  futile. 

Q.    Through  the  character  of  the  jury  ? 

A.  Yes.  There  were  three  or  four  persons  on  the  jury,  who  would  not 
convict  under  any  state  of  evidence.  I  think  that  after  that  court  adjourned, 
and  as  soon  as  it  was  understood  that  that  was  to  be  the  result,  there  was  a 
much  larger  sale,  and  a  much  more  open  sale  in  the  county  than  before,  and 
a  very  little  restraint  by  the  force  of  this  law  even. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Do  you  design  to  be  understood,  that  you  think 
there  is  anything  so  exceptional  in  reference  to  this  description  of  legislation 
that  the  making  of  complaints  ought  to  be  left  by  the  community  to  hired 
officers,  instead  of  the  individual  citizens  making  complaints  of  facts  coming 
within  their  knowledge  ? 

A.  No.  I  think  the  trouble  with  the  law  has  always  been,  that  citizens, 
either  directly  or  indirectly,  by  themselves  or  by  the  medium  of  officers,  have 
not  interested  themselves  in  its  execution,  but  have  felt  that  they  had  a 
machine. 

Q.  Supposing  that  the  men  who  are  called  temperance  men  especially, 
in  your  district,  had  interested  themselves  to  convict  those  who  are  guilty  of 
assault  and  battery,  would  there  have  been  any  necessity  for  the  State 
Constables  ? 

A.    I  think  not. 

Q.  Then  there  is  not  the  same  feelings  existing  in  the  minds  of  the  people 
as  to  moral  responsibility  on  this  subject,  as  with  reference  to  others  ? 

A.  It  did  not  exist  on  this  subject ;  but  whether  it  did  not  have  an  influ- 
ence on  other  subjects,  I  am  not  prepared  to  say. 

Q.    Is  not  every  good  citizen  interested  in  suppressing  drunkenness  ? 

A.    I  think  they  are,  in  their  sentiments. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  BEXJ.  W.  HARRIS. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)    You  are  now  collector  in  the  Second  District  ? 
A.    I  am. 

Q.  Prior  to  your  flccupying  that  position,  for  how  many  years  was  you  the 
District  Attorney  for  the  South-Eastern  District? 


68  APPENDIX. 

A.     Eight  years  ;  from  July  1858  until  July  last  year. 
Q.     Be  kind  enough  to  give  the  Committee  the  results  of  your  experience 
as  District  Attorney,  in  endeavoring  to  make  practical  and  efficient  the  pres- 
ent liquor  law. 

A.  I  came  here  in  obedience  to  the  call  of  the  Chairman,  to  answer  such 
questions  and  give  such  information  as  my  experience  might  enable  me  to  do. 
I  do  not  come  as  an  advocate  of  any  law  or  system  of  law.  I  am  prepared  to 
give  my  experience  with  regard  to  the  present  law.  For  the  last  eight  years, 
particularly  the  last  three  years,  in  the  counties  which  composed  my  district, 
very  earnest  efforts  were  made  to  suppress  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors. 
The  constabulary  law  gave  me  the  assistance  of  some  very  efficient  men  ;  and, 
during  that  part  of  the  time,  or  since  the  constabulary  law  went  into  effect, 
something  has  been  accomplished  in  the  way  of  closing  up  the  respectable 
liquor  shops,  if  you  can  apply  that  term  to  them,  particularly  in  the  town  of 
Dorchester.  There,  two  of  the  principal  hotels  were  closed  entirely,  as  we 
supposed,  by  the  assistance  of  the  State  Constables,  aided  by  the  Board  of 
Selectmen  of  that  town.  But  I  do  not  know  whether,  upon  the  whole,  there  is 
less  liquor  sold  in  the  county  of  Norfolk  to-day  than  before.  It  is  not  sold  in 
the  same  places.  I  have  found  some  difficulties  in  that  law  which  I  would 
like  to  state  to  the  Committee.  The  law  calls  upon  the  prosecuting  officer  to 
move  for  the  punishment  of  every  person  convicted  of  the  crime  of  being  a 
common  seller  of  intoxicating  liquors  ;  and,  in  the  last  year  or  two,  the  Dis- 
trict Attorney  has  had  no  discretion ;  he  has  been  obliged  to  close  his  ears 
to  all  solicitations,  and  leave  the  matter  of  punishment  to  the  courts.  The 
law  imposes  a  fine  of  fifty  dollars,  and  imprisonment  of  three  or  six 
months.  Parties  have  been  in  the  habit  of  expending  large  sums  of  money 
to  resist  their  imprisonment.  One  landlord  was  prosecuted  to  the  extent  of 
the  law.  Every  effort  was  made  to  bring  him  to  punishment.  He  employed 
eminent  counsel,  removing  the  case  to  the  U.  S.  Court,  and  spent  some  two 
or  three  thousand  dollars  in  defending  himself.  Those  two  or  three  thousand 
dollars  had  more  effect  in  causing  him  to  stop  selling  liquor,  than  the  fear 
of  imprisonment. 

It  has  always  appeared  to  me  that  the  law,  now  on  the  statute  book,  should 
make  some  distinction  between  the  case  of  the  poor  Irishwoman — one  who  sells 
lager  beer — and  the  rich  landlord.  I  think  there  should  have  been  a  provision 
like  this, — that  the  court  should  sentence  by  a  fine  of  not  less  than  fifty,  nor 
more  than  two  thousand  dollars,  or  imprisonment  for  not  less  than  three,  nor 
more  than  twelve  months.  The  court  is  now  entirely  without  discretion, 
whether  the  person  is  one  who  sells  to  make  all  the  money  he  can  out  of  the 
business,  or  a/poor  woman  who  sells  a  barrel  of  ale  to  help  support  her  chil- 
dren. In  that  respect,  the  law  has  been  in  fault,  I  think. 

In  another  respect,  I  think  there  is  a  defect.  It  has  been  said  by  Mr. 
Gillette,  that  in  some  of  the  small  towns  in  his  district,  the  sale  has  been  sup- 
pressed. I  think  it  is  so  in  my  district.  In  many  small  towns,  the  open  sale 
has  been  driven  out  of  sight.  But  resort  is  had  to  the  system  of  expresses, 
which  is  so  prevalent.  They  bring  the  liquors  into  the  towns  for  those  who 
wish  to  consume  them,  just  as  much  as  they  desire.  Yfur  law  on  that  sub- 
ject is  this :  that  you  may  prosecute  an  expressman  who  brings  liquor,  but  you 


APPENDIX.  69 

must  prove  that  he  either  bought  it  at  some  place  not  authorized  to  sell,  or 
that  he  had  reason  to  suppose  it  was  to  be  sold  at  some  place  contrary  to  law. 
It  is  impossible  to  comply  with  these  requirements.  The  consequence  is,  that 
where  you  drive  it  from  the  shops,  you  increase  the  trade  of  the  expressmen. 
And  in  the  vicinity  of  large  places  like  Boston,  or  Worcester,  or  Taunton, 
to  which  the  express  runs,  I  don't  think  the  sale  is  stopped.  So  far  as  a 
license  law  goes,  my  views  are  very  unsettled  on  that  subject.  I  do  not  believe 
that  the  public  necessity  calls  for  the  license  of  open  grog-shops.  It  may  be 
necessary  that  the  sale  of  liquor  should  be  provided  for  in  some  manner, 
but  I  do  not  believe  that  any  hotel  needs  to  keep  a  bar.  In  my  district, 
take,  for  instance,  the  county  of  Norfolk  and  that  part  embracng  Roxbury 
and  Dorchester,  I  think  I  may  say  that  as  vigorous  efforts  have  been  made 
to  suppress  the  sale  there  as  anywhere.  But  I  do  not  believe  that,  in 
Koxbury  particularly,  one  step  was  gained  before  the  constabulary  law  was 
in  force.  I  remember  that  the  police  of  Roxbury  were  authorized  to  pros- 
ecute every  seller,  and  I  suppose  they  did  it.  The  number  of  prosecutions 
that  came  up  led  me  to  think  so.  We  prosecuted  and  convicted  a  great 
many ;  a  great  many  escaped.  But  I  was  told  afterward  that  nearly  as 
many  grog-shops  sprung  up  behind  us  as  we  suppressed.  In  a  large  town 
like  Roxbury,  with  their  facilities  for  getting  liquor,  it  is  almost  impossible 
to  suppress  the  traffic  entirely,  although  much  has  been  gained  of  late. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  I  understand  you  to  speak  of  the  imperfections 
of  the  present  law.  Which,  in  your  judgment,  would  be  most  expedient  to 
do — to  adopt  an  entirely  new  system,  or  amend  the  present  law  ? 

A.  As  a  lawyer,  I  should  say,  that  wherever  you  can  preserve  those  parts 
of  the  law  which  have  been  now  well  settled  by  the  courts,  it  is,  of  course, 
desirable  to  do  so.  A  new  law  becomes  practically  inoperative  for  a  time 
until  the  legal  principles  are  settled.  This  law  has  the  advantage  of  having 
every  legal  question  settled. 
.  Q.  Did  you  ever  know  of  a  license  law  that  operated  to  restrain  the  traffic  ? 

A.  The  license  law  which  prevailed  in  this  Commonwealth  was  in  opera- 
tion so  long  ago  that  I  was  not  an  observer  to  any  extent. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  What  would  you  think  of  having  incorporated 
upon  the  present  system  a  system  of  license  in  very  moderate  numbers,  as  to 
its  effect  upon  the  large  towns  which  you  say  this  law  does  not  effectually 
reach  ?  Take  Roxbury,  for  instance.  Suppose  a  certain  number  of  grocers 
were  licensed  to  sell,  and  the  law  could  be  in  effect  as  to  everybody  else, 
whether  or  not  that  would  have  a  good  effect  ? 

A.  I  think  a  law  properly  constructed,  and  in  the  proper  hands  for  its 
administration,  might  be  made  which  would  accomplish  the  desired  end. 
Having  that  in  view,  if  any  changes  are  made  in  this  law,  the  law  should  not 
be  made  in  the  interest  of  liquor-dealers,  but  in  the  interest  of  the  com- 
munity, wholly.  I  have  no  sympathy  with  any  law  which  provides  for  the 
protection  of  any  men  who  are  persistently  violating  the  present  law.  I  can 
conceive  of  a  license  law  being  passed,  and  the  appointment  of  proper  men, 
under  proper  restrictions,  which  would  restrain  the  trade  which  is  now  pre- 
vailing. For  instance,  suppose  a  law  were  passed  making  a  public  nuisance 
every  bar  in  the  Commonwealth,  every  place  where  liquor  could  be  sold  by 


70  APPENDIX. 

the  glass  or  drink ;  if  you  provide  that  it  may  be  sold  in  larger  quantities,  as  by 
the  gallon,  and  to  be  carried  away,  I  can  conceive  of  its  being  useful. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  in  the  state  of  public  sentiment,  or  of  the  public 
judgment,  as  to  the  principle  of  this  law  which  makes  it  difficult  to  enforce  it 
in  large  cities  ? 

A.  The  difficulty  that  the  prosecuting  officer  meets  with  officially  is,  that 
after  he  has  exerted  himself  till  he  has  a  man  ready  to  go  to  the  House  of 
Correction,  in  spite  of  the  lawyers  employed  by  the  associated  liquor  interest, 
if  he  is  a  man  of  a  respectable  family,  having  a  wife  who  is  respected  by  the 
community,  having  respectable  daughters,  then  the  very  selectmen,  the  minis- 
ters, the  very  best  men  come  forward  and  say  to  the  District  Attorney,  "  We 
pray  you  to  release  him ;  the  law  has  had  its  effect."  The  answer  of  the 
District  Attorney  is,  that  he  has  nothing  to  do  with  it.  Then  it  goes  to  the 
courts ;  and  judges  have  hearts,  and  they  will  yield.  The  consequence  is,  the 
prosecuting  officer,  having  brought  the  criminal  to  the  last  gasp,  he  is  released- 
Public  sentiment  is  not  up  to  the  execution  of  the  law.  I  remember  that  we 
had  a  large  class  of  cases  in  Dorchester.  I  said  to  the  authorities,  My  practice 
is  to  have  these  first  presented  to  the  trial  justice.  They  said,  We  think  we  are 
all  right ;  we,  ask  you  to  go  ahead.  I  said,  I  have  prosecuted  a  great  many 
people  from  Dorchester,  and  I  hardly  ever  had  a  case,  when  I  was  ready  to 
sentence,  that  a  large  number  of  respectable  people  did  not  ask  for  their 
relief.  I  said  I  would  not  touch  the  cases  unless  they  would  say  they  would 
not  interfere.  Then  we  went  on  until  the  bottom  dropped  out,  last 
winter.  I  had  on  my  docket  two  hundred  and  twenty  cases,  and  before  I  left 
the  office  in  April  last,  knowing  I  should  probably  go  out  of  office,  I  made  an 
effort  to  get  pleas  of  guilty  or  convictions  in  almost  every  case.  I  think 
they  would  have  been  carried  out  finally. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     State  what  you  mean  by  the  bottom  dropping  out  ? 

A.  I  mean  to  say  that  in  all  cases  in  which  a  party  was  charged  with 
having  kept  a  common  nuisance  ;  that  is  to  say,  a  place  for  selling  intoxicating 
liquors  illegally,  the  law  passed  last  winter  was  supposed  to  have  relieved 
those  cases,  the  court  being  deprived  of  the  power  to  sentence. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  Is  there  a  distinction  in  the  public  mind  between 
the  infraction  of  this  law  and  in  other  cases  ? 

A .     Undoubtedly. 

Q.  The  law  making  it  a  crime  to  sell,  leads  people  to  inquire  into  the 
principle  of  the  law,  does  it  not  ? 

A .  I  do  not  know  that  I  can  give  the  reasons.  Men  who  are  charged  with 
selling  liquor,  if  their  social  relations  are  respectable,  have  a  great  many  per- 
sons who  ask  for  their  release,  who  .would  not  if  they  were  charged  with 
larceny  or  other  crime. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Does  this  indicate  an  opinion  in  favor  of  the  open 
sale,  or  is  it  an  act  of  mercy  on  the  part  of  clergymen  and  others,  based  on 
the  pledge  that  he  will  not  go  again  into  the  traffic  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  it  is  believed  to  be  an  act  of  mercy ;  but  I  do  not 
believe  the  same  act  of  mercy  would  be  extended  to  him,  if  the  fine  lie  was 
called  upon  to  pay  was  large  enough  to  swing  half  his  estate.  They  would 


APPENDIX.  71 

say,  you  have  been,  making  money  in  violation  of  the  law,  and  you  ought;  to 
pay  for  it. 

Q.     Then  you  don't  think  the  penalty  large  enough  ? 

A .  I  think  the  government  should  have  it  in  its  power  to  insist  upon  it 
that  the  man  who  violates  the  law  by  selling  intoxicating  liquors,  should  be 
obliged  to  pay  a  large  sum  of  money.  I  think  persons'  pockets  are  touched 
more  than  their  consciences.  I  have  observed  among  extreme  men  an  opinion 
that  our  judges  are  unworthy  to  be  trusted  with  this  subject.  I  think 
the  law  should  leave  much  to  the  courts..  We  have  as  pure  a  court  as 
can  be  found  anywhere,  and  in  the  administration  of  the  liquor  law,  I 
never  found  a  judge  who  was  not  willing  to  co-operate  with  me.  I 
think  it  should  be  left  with  them  to  determine  whether  the  offender 
is  an  old  one  or  not,  and  to  graduate  the  punishment  according  to  the 
offence. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     Would  you  not  have  a  minimum  ? 

A .  Yes.  I  am  fully  of  opinion  that  if  there  had  been  this  feature  of  the 
law,  I  could  have  crushed  out  many  who  sell  rum  up  to  the  present  moment. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  not  having  succeeded  in  driving  out  the  traffic  in  large 
towns,  though  you  have  in  small  places.  Have  you  ever  used  the  seizure 
clause  ? 

A .  The  seizure  clause  is  being  used  by  the  constabulary  force,  and  I  think 
it  is  a  great  weapon  in  their  hands.  But  before,  it  was  difficult  to  find  gen- 
tlemen in  the  community  who  would  go  before  a  magistrate,  and  swear  that  they 
had  reason  to  believe  that  intoxicating  liquors  were  to  be  found  for  sale  in  a 
certain  place ;  and  then  it  was  quite  as  difficult  to  find  an  officer  who  would 
go  forward  and  make  the  seizure. 

Q.    You  think  it  is  a  good  weapon  where  it  is  used  ? 

A.  Before  that  law  was  in  operation,  it  was  the  business  of  nobody  to 
enforce  the  law.  Before  I  was  District  Attorney  I  was  a  justice,  and  I  have 
been  obliged  to  go  to  the  board  of  selectmen  and  ask  them  to  sign  a  com- 
plaints against  parties  where  I  deemed  a  prosecution  necessary,  and  I  found 
them  very  reluctant  to  do  it. 

TESTIMONY  OF  MR.  GILLETTE,  (continued.') 

Mr.  GILLETTE.  I  should  like  to  make  one  qualifying  statement.  I  said 
in  my  statement  that  I  was  greatly  embarrassed  by  having  rumsellers  on  the 
jury.  That  has  been  the  case  in  some  instances.  Many  hundred  dollars 
were  lost  in  consequence  of  it.  It  is  also  true  that  in  a  number  of  instances 
I  have  had  landlords  and  traffickers  on  the  jury,  who  have  convicted  every 
time  that  the  evidence  conscientiously  required  it. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Still,  do  you  think  it  a  wholesome  state  of  things  to 
commit  the  carrying  out  of  the  liquor  law  to  his  fellow-liquor  sellers  ? 
A.    No,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EX-JUDGE  GEOBGE  P.  SANGEB. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     How  many  years  have  you  been  prosecuting 
officer  in  the  county  of  Suffolk  ? 
A.    In  the  years  1853  and  1854,  and  since  the  spring  of  1861. 


72  APPENDIX. 

Q.  State  the  results  of  your  experience,  as  a  judicial  magistrate  and  prose- 
cuting officer,  in  the  execution  of  the  laws  of  the  State. 

A.  I  come  here,  as  brother  Harris  did,  on  the  summons  of  theCommittee ; 
I  am  willing  to  answer  any  questions  that  may  be  put.  I  shall  have  to  limit 
my  statement  to  my  own  experience.  My  experience  commenced  in  1853.  I 
was  prosecuting  officer  in  1853.  The  law  of  1852  was  in  force,  which,  as  the 
Committee  know,  had  for  the  penalty,  fine,  and  not  necessarily  imprisonment. 
In  enforcing  that  law  there  were  some  legal  objections  made.  All  legal  objec- 
tions were  made  that  properly  could  be  made,  to  get  the  opinion  of  the 
Supreme  Court  on  them,  and  the  questions  of  law  settled.  I  recollect  dis- 
tinctly that  one  of  the  first  trials  among  these  cases  was  that  of  a  Mr.  Brown  of 
South  Boston.  Samuel  Dunn  Parker,  Esquire,  defended  it.  We  had  a 
stiff  fight.  The  testimony  was  sufficient  to  warrant  the  jury  to  convict,  and 
they  did  convict,  and  exceptions  were  allowed.  The  result  of  these  trials  was 
that  in  subsequent  indictments  verdicts  were  taken  by  consent,  or  pleas  of 
guilty  were  entered  and  the  cases  continued  to  abide  Brown's  case.  The 
question  of  law  was  not  settled  until  I  had  left  the  office  of  District  Attorney. 
But  the  exceptions  were  overruled  by  the  Supreme  Court,  and  the  cases  went 
back  for  sentence ;  and  quite  a  large  revenue  was  derived  to  the  county  from 
fines  under  those  prosecutions. 

Very  soon,  the  law  of  1855  went  into  operation,  by  which  the  penalty  was 
changed  so  that' imprisonment  was  a  necessary  punishment.  I  believe  my  own 
experience  in  Suffolk  County,  as  a  judge,  under  the  law  of  1855,  was  limited  to 
the  trial  of  one  case ;  because,  as  you  recollect,  the  law  establishing  the  Superior 
Court  in  the  city  of  Boston,  relieved  the  judges  of  the  Court  of  Common 
Pleas  from  any  duties  in  Suffolk  County.  I  know  I  never  held  any  court  in 
the  county  except  temporarily  to  relieve  the  judge J;o  whom  the  term  had  been 
assigned.  In  the  case  last  spoken  of,  the  defendant  was  charged  with  being  a 
common  seller.  The  counsel  for  the  defendant  admitted  that  his  client  had 
sold  intoxicating  liquors  as  alleged  in  the  indictment,  but  claimed,  that  under 
the  jury  law  which  was  passed  by  the  same  legislature  that  enacted  the  pro- 
hibitory law,  the  jury  had  the  right  to  judge  of  the  law.  That  was  the  only 
easel  tried  in  Suffolk  County,  while  a  judge,  so  far  as  I  now  recollect.  The 
juries  refusing  to  convict  common  sellers,  the  prosecutions  made  afterwards 
w.ere  under  the  Nuisance  Act,  so  called.  I  knew  nothing  of  those  personally 
until  1861.  From  1861  until  the  present  time,  there  has  been  no  substantial 
difficulty  in  getting  verdicts  in  Boston,  in  nuisance  cases — in  such  cases  as 
were  prosecuted.  Those  which  were  prosecuted  were  prosecuted  by  the 
police,  and  were  substantially  cases  of  nuisance  without  reference  to  this 
statute.  There  was  such  a  state  of  things  about  the  places  that  they  would  be 
nuisances  at  common  law. 

But  I  believe  that,  from  the  time  the  law  of  1855  went  into  effect  until  the 
fall  of  1865,  there  was  not  a  conviction,  in  Suffolk  County,  of  a  person  charged 
with  being  a  common  seller.  I  may  be  incorrect  in  this  matter ;  but  I  know 
that,  during  the  fall  of  1865,  the  juries  were  so  constituted,  or  the  feeling  of 
the  public  had  so  changed,  the  original  excitement  in  reference  to  the  passage 
of  the  Act  having  so  died  away,  that  the  jurors  came  up  conscientiously  to  the 
discharge  of  their  duties  as  jurors,  and,  in  cases  where  the  evidence  required  it, 


APPENDIX.  73 

they  convicted  defendants  under  indictments  both  as  common  sellers  and  as 
maintaining  liquor  nuisances.  Up  to  that  time,  prosecutions  had  been 
almost  entirely  under  the  Nuisance  Act,  and  there  was  no  difficulty  in  getting 
convictions.  Since,  they  have  been  of  both  kinds. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)     Were  there  large  numbers  then  ? 

A.  It  used  to  be  considered  so.  Then  the  average  was  (say)  fifty  a  month. 
This  present  month,  February,  1867,  the  number  of  liquor  indictments  was 
about  four  hundred  and  fifty.  There  are  twenty-nine  hundred  cases  since 
chapter  280  of  1866  went  into  effect. 

The  first  indictment  against  the  common  seller,  tried  in  the  .fall  of  1865, 
was  put  as  an  experiment.  We  went  to  the  trial  with  some  misgivings,  but 
with  confidence  that  although  the  sentiments  of  the  jurors  were  adverse  to 
the  law,  although  some  of  the  jurors  were  more  or  less  interested  in  the 
traffic,  and  although  eleven  out  of  twelve,  if  legislators,  would  not  have  voted 
for  the  law,  yet  that  (and  the  event  did  so  prove,)  they  had  that  regard 
for  their  duty  and  their  oath  that  they  would  find  a  verdict  if  the  evidence 
was  sufficient.  They  did  so ;  and  after  that  there  were  more  or  less  cases  tried 
and  verdicts  taken ;  there  were  but  few  trials  however.  And  it  was  probably 
in  consequence  of  the  fact  that  jurors  would  convict  that  the  defendants 
were  willing  to  plead  guilty,  and  those  cases  were  continued  to  await  the 
decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  in  McGuire's  case.  They 
were  so  continued.  That  was  the  work  of  the  court  in  Suffolk  County  dur- 
ing 1865  and  the  beginning  of  1866, — January,  February,  March,  April 
and  May,  1866.  The  decision  in  McGuire's  case  was  made  sometime  in 
March.  All  the  cases  prior  to  that  are  on  the  docket  now.  And  there  is  a 
case  now  before  the  Supreme  Court  of  this  Commonwealth,  raising  the  ques- 
tion of  the  power  of  the  court  to  sentence  now  in  nuisances  prior  to  the  time 
when  the  chapter  280  of  1866  .took  effect,  notwithstanding  that  Act.  Since 
chapter  280  went  into  operation,  another  question  of  law  has  been  raised,  and 
that  is  before  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States.  I  suppose  it  is  sub- 
stantially settled  in  Mrs.  Sinnot's  case.  She  was  charged  in  the  United 
States  Court,  for  this  district,  with  selling  liquor  without  having  obtained 
license.  She  replied,  you  ought  not  to  charge  me  for  a  license  unless  you 
protect  me  in  sales  under  it.  She  said  it  was  unconstitutional.  The  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  says  it  is  constitutional.  That,  I  suppose,  settles 
the  question. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     State  that  decision  again,  if  you  please. 

A.  Mrs.  Sinnot  was  indicted  in  the  United  States  Court  for  being  a 
retailer  of  liquor  without  obtaining  a  retailer's  license  from  the  revenue  offi- 
cers. She  defended  in  that  case,  because  she  said  if  she  got  the  license  they 
would  not  protect  her  in  sales  under  it,  and  because  it  was  unconstitutional  to 
require  her  to  take  out  a  license  when  they  would  not  protect  her  in  sales 
under  it.  That  question  was  carried  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States.  They  have  decided,  as  I  understand,  that  the  law  requiring  a  license 
to  be  taken  out  before  a  person  acts  as  a  retailer  is  constitutional,  and  must  be 
complied  with,  although  it  gives  no  right  to  sell  in  violation  of  the  State 
laws.  < 

10 


74  APPENDIX. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  What  is  your  opinion  in  regard  to  the  effect  of  so 
many  prosecutions  upon  the  sale  of  liquor  in  Boston  ?  Has  it  increased  or 
diminished  it? 

A.  It  has  a  tendency  to  diminish  it,  and  it  has  in  fact  diminished  it.  That 
is  seen  clearly  since  the  decision  in  Mrs.  Sinnot's  case ;  for  quite  a  number 
have  come  to  me  since  then  and  said  they  would  throw  up  the  business.  So 
long  as  there  was  only  a  plea  of  guilty,  and  it  was  continued  to  abide  a  deci- 
sion, it  seemed  easy  ;  something  like  giving  a  promissory  note — easy  to  give, 
but  hard  to  pay.  Such  a  plea  was  often  put  in,  and  the  case  continued  to 
abide ;  very  likely  by  the  advice  of  counsel,  that  no  sentence  would  ever  be 
imposed.  But  now  we  have  about  twenty-nine  hundred  cases,  against  about 
eleven  hundred  individuals,  in  which  there  are  pleas  of  guilty.  And  when 
the  decision  comes  back  from  the  Supreme  Court,  they  will  be  ready  for  sen- 
tence. The  knowledge  of  that  fact  is  affecting  very  seriously  their  feelings. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  What  would  be  the  amount  of  fines,  if  all  are 
sentenced  the  minimum  fine  ? 

A .     Fifty  times  the  number  of  cases  ;  $50  being  the  minimum  fine. 

Q.     What  discretion  has  the  court  under  this  law  ? 

A.  The  fine  is  not  less  than  fifty,  nor  more  than  one  hundred  dollars.  I 
ought,  perhaps,  to  say  that  the  operation  of  chapter  280  of  1866,  decreasing 
the  amount  of  the  fine  in  nuisance  cases,  from  a  minimum  of  $200  and  a  maxi- 
mum of  $1,000,  to  the  present  minimum  of  $50  and  a  maximum  of  $100,  is 
unfavorable  to  the  revenue  from  fines  in  this  county.  Under  the  former 
law,  fines  of  $300,  $450,  and  $500,  were  not  uncommon,  and  in  some  cases  the 
maximum  fine  of  $1,000  was  .imposed ;  now  the  highest  fine  is  $100.  If  the 
minimum  fine  could  be  as  now,  or  lower,  and  the  maximum  as  before,  it  would 
work  better  in  this  county. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  Can  the  law  be  enforced  so  as  to  accomplish  the 
prevention  of  the  sale  in  Boston  ? 

A.  I  think  it  can  be  so  enforced  as  in  time  to  accomplish  the  prevention 
of  the  open  sale.  It  is  a  matter  of  time ;  but  it  can  be  done  by  using  the 
seizure  clause. 

Q,  How  far  would  the  suppression  of  the  open  sale  tend  to  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  sale  and  drinking  ? 

A.  I  should  not  have  the  opportunity  to  decide  this  question,  which  people 
on  the  street  would  have. 

Q-    Is  it  sold  still,  but  less  openly  ? 

A .  1  have  no  doubt  it  is  sold,  but  less  openly.  The  work  of  suppression 
is  gradual. 

Q.  Which  would  be  most  likely  to  protect  the  country  and  the  peace  of 
the  community — a  system  by  which  some  persons  should  be  authorized  to  sell, 
or  a  system  by  which  every  person  should  be  prohibited  from  selling  ? 

A.  That  would  depend  very  much,  indeed,  upon  the  system.  But,  looking 
at  it  as.  a  prosecuting  officer,  if  there  were  what  is  familiarly  called  a  license 
law  in  operation,  and  then  persons  were  charged  with  offending  against  the 
law — that  is  selling  without  a  license — some  of  the  objections  against  the 
present  law  would  be  avoided.  One  objection  is,  that  the  law  is  unjust,  that 
it  is  entirely  prohibitory,  and  that  the  sale  should  not  be  prohibited ;  lhat  in 


APPENDIX.  75 

matters  of  diet,  and  similar  matters,  there  should  be  no  prohibitory  law.  The 
single  objection  that  it  was  prohibitory  would  be  removed.  But  there  would 
be  another  class  of  objections  raised  under  the  operation  of  a  license  law, 
such  as  that  there  was  favoritism.  But  now  it  is  understood  that  the  law 
itself  bears  equally  upon  all.  In  the  trial  of  cases,  if  there  were  indictments 
under  the  license  law,  that  specific  objection  would  be  raised :  defendants  or 
their  counsel  would  say  that  it  was  class  legislation,  and  therefore  unfair. 
What  would  be  the  effect  in  the  prosecution  and  trial  of  such  cases  would 
remain  to  be  seen  from  experience. 

With  reference  to  it  in  another  point  of  view,  and  that  is  as  the  effect  upon 
the  community,  my  impression  is,  as  Boston  is  now,  that  the  having  of  a 
license  law  would  turn  to  the  support  of  that  law  much  influence  which  is 
now  lost  to  the  law.  It  would  raise  an  opposition  in  other  quarters  which 
would  be  against  it.  The  public  sentiment  of  Boston,  as  I  think,  is  in  favor 
of  a  license  law  rather  than  a  prohibitory  law. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  FAY.)     Upon  whom  would  you  confer  the  power  to  license  ? 

A .     Upon  men  who  have  the  interest  of  the  community  most  at  heart. 

Q.     We  all  have  that.     But  in  this  community  ? 

A.  I  certainly  should  not  wish  to  be  one.  I  mean  that  it  would  not  be  a 
pleasant  power  to  confer  upon  any  one.  But  I  would  confer  it  upon  a  body 
of  men  who  are  as  unsusceptible  of  influences  as  the  judges  of  our  Supreme 
Court — upon  men  who  .would  decide  the  matter  entirely  for  the  best  interest 
of  the  community. 

Q.     Would  you  make  the  price  of  a  license  high  or  low  ? 

A.    I  suppose  that  the  question  of  revenue  comes  in  there. 

Q.    For  the  best  interest  of  society  ?    I  do  not  care  about  the  revenue. 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  the  best  interest  of  society  would  require  any  fee. 
I  suppose  the  best  interest  of  society  would  be  to  limit  it  so  as  to  do  the  least 
possible  harm.  And  in  that  way,  I  do  not  see  how  the  amount  that  is  to  be 
charged,  except  that  the  amount  might  prevent  many  from  applying  for 
license,  would  have  any  effect. 

Q.  Do  you  think  any  authority  would  grant  licenses  to  a  very  large 
number  of  persons  ? 

A.    I  cannot  say.    I  should  think  if  they  did,  it  would  be  unfortunate. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Is  it  your  opinion  that  the  welfare  of  the  com- 
munity requires  the  restriction,  as  far  as  practicable,  of  the  sale  of  intoxicating 
drinks  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.    Yes.     I  do  not  think  there  should  be  any  sale  at  any  open  bar. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  present  law  as  powerful  an  instrument  as  we  are 
likely  to  have,  if  that  were  used  properly,  and  honestly  worked  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  But  that  would  not  express  my  views  fully;  for  while  I 
believe  in  restricting  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  and  their  sale  at  an  open 
bar,  either  in  hotels  or  places  of  common  resort,  still  I  think,  as  Boston  is 
situated,  I  would,  as  a  legislator,  vote  for  a  law  under  which  permission  might 
be  given  to  keepers  of  hotels,  for  instance,  that  they  might  furnish  it  to  their 
guests,  as  they  ask  in  their  petition  here  (though  I  have  not  carefully  read 
that  petition ;)  so  that  those  who  stop  at  the  hotels  might  find  the  comforts 
they  would  find  at  home. 


76  APPENDIX. 

Q.  You  would  not  make  any  distinction  between  residents  and  others,  in 
such  sales  ? 

A.  No,  I  do  not  say  that  citizens  ought  not  to  have  places  where  they  can 
purchase  alcoholic  or  fermented  liquors  for  medicinal  and  other  purposes. 

Q.  Still,  in  the  interest  of  the  suppression  of  the  traffic,  you  are  of  the 
opinion  that  no  more  powerful  instrument  can  be  had  than  the  present  law  ? 

A.  You  cannot  have  a  better  machine.  The  reason  is,  as  gentlemen  are 
aware,  that  there  is  the  ordinary  proceeding,  the  punishment  for  sales,  and 
then  that  other  most  efficient  feature,  the  seizure,  which  may  be  repeated 
as  often  as  any  one  can  be  found  who  makes  oath  that  there  is  reason  to 
believe  that  sales  are  made  in  any  place.  And  it  is  for  the  reason  that 
brother  Harris  stated,  that  you  can  touch  men  so  strongly  in  their  pockets. 
Men  will  not  be  likely  to  engage  in  a  business  where  they  are  likely  to  have 
every  day  seizures  made  of  their  stock  in  trade. 

Q.  ^By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  I  understand  you  to  believe  that  it  is  possible, 
under  the  operation  of  the  present  law,  to  greatly  restrain  the  traffic  in 
Boston  ? 

A.     Yes,  the  open  traffic. 

Q.     You  think  that  law  goes  towards  diminishing  it  ? 

A.    Yes,  it  is  one  step. 

Q.  What  would  you  think  of  the  idea  of  the  mayor  and  aldermen  of 
Boston,  elected,  as  they  are,  by  the  class  of  people  that  they  are,  having  full 
authority  to  give  licenses  to  whom  they  pleased  ? 

A.  They  are  very  reputable  people,  I  think.  I  don't  think  you  ought  to 
ask  me  to  give  an  opinion.  They  are  very  reputable :  I  don't  know  any 
better  man,  or  one  who  has  the  interest  of  temperance  more  at  heart  than 
Mayor  Norcross  has. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Do  you  suppose  it  is  possible,  by  any  machinery, 
to  wholly  suppress  the  traffic  ? 

A .  No,  sir.  I  answer  the  question  precisely  as  it  is  put.  Nor  do  I  suppose 
it  will  be  possible  to  suppress  the  crime  of  larceny.  There  will  always  be 
sometime  somebody  who  will  violate  law ;  and  so  long  as  people  wish  to 
drink,  if  they  cannot  get  it  openly  they  will  get  it  secretly. 

Q.  Assuming  this  large  demand  which  exists  in  the  community,  and 
supposing  you  are  successful  in  convicting  a  man  a  day  in  the  criminal  court, 
for  every  day  in  the  year,  while  this  large  demand  exists,  can  you  make  any 
perceptible  impression  in  the  community  further  than  to  drive  it  into  secret 
and  contraband  channels  ? 

A.  If  I  should  answer  that  question  yes  or  no,  it  would  limit  me  to  the 
effect  of  three  hundred  prosecutions  in  one  year.  I  do  not  suppose  that 
would  be  the  limit ;  because  you  will  see  that  the  most  efficient  weapon  in 
the  execution  of  the  law,  is  the  seizure  clause.  And  all  I  have  said  with 
reference  to  its  execution. in  the  city  of  Boston  shows,  that  it  is  a  question  of 
time.  It  cannot  be  done  in  a  moment.  It  may  be  that  several  juries  would 
be  found  who  would  not  convict. 

Adjourned. 


APPENDIX.  77 


FOUKTH  DAY. 

TUESDAY,  February  26, 1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  and  the  hearing  of  testimony  was  further 
continued. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EX-JUDGE  GEORGE  P.  SANGER,  (continued.) 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  I  will  ask  you,  looking  at  the  subject  under 
consideration  from  your  point  of  view,  and  in  view  of  the  information  which 
has  been  obtained  by  you  in  your  capacity  of  judge  and  prosecuting  officer, 
fcr  many  years,  as  well  as  in  view  of  the  facts  known  to  you  as  a  citizen,  what 
you  would  advise,  were  you  a  legislator,  in  reference  to  the  legislation  for  the 
future,  as  best  adapted  to  diminish  drinking,  maintain  order,  and  preserve  the 
rights  of  the  people  ? 

A.  The  question  is  a  comprehensive  one.  Upon  the  question  of  prohib- 
iting drunkenness  and  maintaining  order,  I  do  not  know  that  I  should  have 
any  change  to  make  in  the  present  legislation ;  that  is  to  say,  I  do  not  think 
that  there  would  be  in  any  system  of  license,  any  less  liquor  sold  than  there 
is  now  under  this  law.  Perhaps  this  law  would  prevent  the  sale  of  liquor 
more ;  but  in  reference  to  what  you  may  call  the  rights  of  the  people,  if  you 
include  it  under  that  name,  I  do  not  know  but  that  I  should  say  the  reverse. 
I  have  been  for  many  years,  and  am  now  in  favor  of  a  stringent  license  law. 
My  own  view  in  reference  to  the  matter  is  this :  I  think  the  laws  in  reference 
to  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  are  substantially  police  regulations.  Of 
course,  therefore,  I  differ  from  those  who  assume  the  temperate  drinking  of 
liquor  to  be  a  vice,  and  the  sale  of  liquor  in  any  form,  except  for  medicinal 
and  mechanical  purposes,  a  crime.  I  do  not  think  that  the  temperate  drinking 
of  alcoholic  and  fermented  liquors  is  a  vice.  I  am  not  prepared  to  go  to  that 
extent.  I  admit  the  fact  which  cannot  be  denied,  that  if  it  is  to  be  indulged 
in,  the  tendency  is  to  go  from  a  temperate  to  an  intemperate  use  ;  but  I  am 
speaking  of  it  as  regards  the  temperate  drinking  of  intoxicating  liquors,  and 
my  views  formed  as  long  ago  as  1852  or  1853,  have  not  been  changed,  but 
have  been  substantially  confirmed,  by  what  I  have  seen  of  the  operation  of 
the  law  since.  I  think  that  the  regulation  of  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors 
is  a  police  regulation.  I  believe  that  the  police  regulations  applicable  to  the 
towns  and  cities  of  this  Commonwealth  are  different,  according  to  the 
different  conditions  of  the  towns.  I  suppose  that  a  system  of  police  regu- 
lation that  would  be  entirely  applicable  to  the  small  towns  in  Berkshire 
County,  or  in  any  county  in  the  Commonwealth,  would  be  as  inapplicable  to 
Boston,  and  as  unlike  those  that  are  fitted  for  Boston,  as  those  which  are  fitted 
for  Boston  would  be  unlike  those  fitted  for  New  Orleans.  I  therefore  deem 
it  a  matter  of  police  regulation,  but  would  leave  the  question  of  police  regu- 
lation to  be  determined  upon  by  the  people  of  the  different  places.  My 


78  APPENDIX. 

theory,  therefore,  would  be,  that  under  the  license  law,  a  Board  of  Commis- 
sioners should  be  appointed  to  grant  licenses ;  that  is,  extending  in  one  sense 
the  provisions  of  the  present  prohibitory  law, — the  present  prohibitory  law 
provides  for  the  sale  of  liquor  for  medicinal  and  mechanical  purposes, — extend- 
ing that  to  other  classes  or  purposes  and  extending  the  number  of  agents. 
I  would  have  a  commission  appointed  that  should  grant  a  convenient  number 
of  licenses  in  those  cities  and  towns,  that  should  by  a  majority  of  the  inhab- 
itants adopt  that  law.  .  I  would,  in  all  other  places,  have  the  present  law, 
applied,  and  would  have  the  machinery  of  the  present  law  applied  to  the 
prevention  and  punishment  of  the  sale  by  those  not  licensed.  In  regard  to  a 
license,  there  should  be  a  suitable  number  of  hotels,  proper,  reputable  hotels, 
in  the  cities  or  towns,  and  such  a  number  either  limited  by  law  or  such  as 
the  Commissioners  should  determine,  (better  be  determined  by  law,)  all 
proper  places,  where  liquor  might  be  sold  to  all  classes  of  people,  excepting 
minors,  or  common  drunkards,  or  people  given  to  drinking  to  excess ;  I  would 
have  such  restrictions  as  are  known  now  to  people  generally,  and  I  would  also 
have  the  selling  confined  to  pure  liquor — perhaps  giving  the  commissioners 
the  right  to  visit  any  place  and  inspect  the  liquor  that  is  sold,  and  if  it  is  not 
pure  destroy  it ;  or  perhaps  regulating  the  purity  of  the  liquor  by  the  manner 
in  which  it  shall  be  purchased.  The  precise  details  of  the  law  could  be 
arranged  by  those  who  drew  it ;  but  the  general  principle  would  be  to  license 
in  those  towns  where  the  people  of  the  towns  wanted  it.  What  we  should 
gain  by  that  is  that  we  should  avoid  that  objection  to  the  law  which  has 
great  weight  with  a  great  many,  (and  with  a  great  many  in  this  city,)  and 
which  is,  I  suppose,  the  cause  of  these  petitions  which  are  sent  in  here  like 
that  of  Mr.  Hardy,  and  by  gentlemen  of  that  class,  respectable  citizens,  who 
have  the  welfare  of  the  city  at  heart  and  who  are  themselves  temperate  men, 
upright  men,  and  Christian  men.  The  feeling  on  their  part  is  that  the  regu- 
lations of  this  kind,  affecting  to  a  certain  extent  their  diet  and  their  drinking, 
are  not  called  for  by  the  people  of  the  towns  or  cities,  but  are  forced  on  them 
by  the  dominant  party  of  the  Commonwealth.  They  do  not  sit  easy  under 
them,  and  they  are  restless  because  they  feel  them  to  be  a  restraint  in  a  matter 
where  they  should  not  be  restrained.  If  it  were  left  to  the  majority  vote  of 
the  people  of  the  cities  and  towns  of  the  Commonwealth,  I  believe  a  very 
large  number  in  the  population  of  the  towns  would  at  once  vote  down  the 
proposition  to  license  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors.  There  would  be  but  a 
few  of  the  towns  and  larger  cities,  so  far  as  I  know,  or  as  far  as  I  have  heard, 
that  would  adopt  a  license  law.  And  in  these  towns  the  difficulty  in  the 
enforcement  of  the  prohibitory  law  would  be  obviated  thereby.  The  result 
would  be  there  would  be  a  free,  unlimited  sale,  in  the  manner  designated  by 
the  law,  of  such  liquors  as  were  permitted  to  be  sold  within  the  limits  of  the 
license  law,  whatever  the  law  might  be.  As  I  expressed'  myself  in  reference 
to  the  prohibitory  law  when  I  was  before  the  Committee  at  a  former  hearing, 
I  think  that  in  time  the  present  prohibitory  law  can  be  enforced ;  and  if  that 
is  so,  of  course  a  license  law  can  be  enforced,  and  those  not  licensed  prevented 
from  selling,  the  government  having  the  same  machinery  to  apply  against 
those  not  licensed  as  there  is  now  against  all. 


APPENDIX.  79 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  If  I  understand  you,  Judge  Sanger,  the  views  you 
are  now  expressing  grow  in  no  measure  out  of  the  weakness  of  the  present 
law,  or  the  failure  to  execute  it  ? 

A.    No,  sir.    I  admit  that  it  can  in  time  be  executed  and  is  executed. 
Q.     And  that  there  is  considerable  effect  upon  the  traffic  in  Boston  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir.    Upon  the  open  traffic. 

Q.  I  understand  you  that  the  basis  of  the  opinion  which  you  express  as  that 
the  temperance  doctrine,  as  it  is  at  present,  is  not  the  true  doctrine  ? 

A.     That  the  temperance  doctrine  of  some  people  is  not. 

Q.    And  that  the  views  of  the  temperance  party  are  wrong  ? 

A.    No,  sir.    I  would  merely  say  that  their  views  are  different  from  mine. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  precisely  what  your  view  is  upon 
this  point  ? 

A.  I  mean  to  say  that  if  you  call  it  a  true  temperance  doctrine,  it  is  not 
the  temperance  doctrine  that  is  maintained  by  the  people  (I  say  it  without 
offence)  whom  you  and  Mr.  Spooner  represent ;  and  I  think  that  the  effect 
of  a  license  law,  precisely  as  I  stated,  would  be  favorable  to  the  cause  of 
temperance  in  the  Commonwealth. 

Q.  Whatever  may  be  true  in  respect  to  alcoholic  beverages  as  such,  even 
as  to  the  moderate  use  of  them,  do  you  think  that  practical  results  can  be 
obtained  by  legislation  based  upon  the  principle  that  they  are  not  useful  ? 

A.     That  they  are  not  injurious. 

Q.     That  is  as  far  as  you  can  go  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;  precisely  in  the  limits  that  I  have  stated. 

Q.  So  far  as  that  principle  would  carry  you,  a  sacrifice  is  made  practically 
in  submitting  to  the  present  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  do  not  see,  if  a  man  wishes  alcoholic  and  fermented  liquor 
in  his  own  house  to  use  at  any  time  as  a  beverage,  how  he  can  get  it. 

Q.  Suppose  he  cannot  get  it  to  use  as  a  beverage.  What  is  the  harm  ?  A 
great  many  people  are  deprived  of  it  and  it  is  not  an  injury  ? 

A.  But  it  is  not  a  good  either.  I  cannot  say  that  the  occasional  drinking 
of  alcoholic  or  fermented  liquor  is  not  actually  good. 

Q.  Well,  it  is  an  important  point  in  the  argument,  to  a  certain  extent, 
on  which  of  these  grounds  you  would  have  your  testimony  received ;  as  to 
whether  it  is  not  injurious,  or  whether  it  is  positively  good. 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  should  say,  and  I  am  perfectly  free  to  say  that  in  some 
instances,  I  consider  it  a  positive  good.  I  have  known  instances,  in  my  own 
case,  where  I  have  been,  I  think,  positively  benefited  by  drinking  a  glass  of 
whiskey ;  or  positively  benefited  by  drinking  a  glass  of  ale  or  porter ;  and 
that,  too,  when  not  given  by  a  physician. 

Q.  If  I  understand  you,  it  was  under  circumstances  where  you  did  not 
regard  it  as  strictly  medicine,  though  it  was  prescribed  by  your  own  judgment  ? 

A.  At  the  time  I"  considered  it  as  a  medicine,  for  I  do  not  use  it  as  a 
beverage. 

Q.  How  do  you  show  that,  under  such  a  state  of  things  as  there  would  be 
under  the  license  system  which  you  suggest,  there  would  not  be  the  same 
drinking  usages  and  the  same  serious  consequences  tending  regularly  to  excess 
that  we  have  always  seen  ? 


80  APPENDIX. 

A.     There  would  be  a  difficulty  of  course. 

Q.    Does  not  all  the  difficulty  that  you  have  had  remain  ? 

A.     I  think  not,  sir. 

Q.     Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  show  why  not  ? 

A.  Because  you  should  make  a  license  law  more  stringent  than  you  have 
ever  had  before,  and  enforce  it. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  furnishing  liquor  to  everybody  but  minors  and 
inebriates,  and  that,  too,  where  there*  is  a  greater  stringency  than  there  has 
been  ever  before  ? 

A.  I  think  you  do  not  understand  what  I  have  said  to-day  in  connection 
with  what  I  said  when  I  was  before  the  Committee  at  the  other  hearing — 
that  I  would  not  have  any  open  bar  or  grog-shop  licensed. 

Q.  You  would  not  have  any  public  bar  where  citizens  could  walk  in  and 
call  for  a  glass  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    You  would  merely  have  a  place  where  the  traveller  could  order  it  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  and  where  the  citizen  might  go  and  get  what  was  desired. 
I  should  not  wish  to  be  limited  to  having  a  prescription  from  a  physician.  I 
do  not  think  it  would  be  entirely  fair  to  limit  it  to  what  is  generally  under- 
stood by  medical  purposes.  I  think  that  if  I  had  friends  who  were  accus- 
tomed to  drink  wine,  or  accustomed  to  drink  fermented  or  alcoholic  liquors,  I 
should  wish  to  permit  them  in  my  house  to  have  what  they  were  accustomed 
to  have  at  their  homes ;  that  I  ought  not  to  send  to  the  agent  or  grocer  to 
buy  the  liquor  as  for  medicinal  purposes  ;  or  that,  if  I  had  it  in  my  house,  I 
should  have  had  to  buy  it  in  anticipation  of  such  purposes. 

Q.  Then  your  idea  is  to  have  places  appointed  under  a  system  of  licenses 
for  the  sale  of  liquor  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.     I  hardly  think  that  is  a  fair  way  to  put  it. 

Q.  I  wish  to  know  if  the  point  is  not  just  this  :  that  because  liquors  as  a 
beverage  are  frequently  not  injurious,  and  frequently  at  other  times  are  bene- 
ficial, and  since  we  are  all  liable  to  have  friends  who  use  it  as  a  beverage, 
therefore  the  sellers  should  have  the  privilege  of  selling  them  to  be  used  as  a 
beverage  as  well  as  for  medicine  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  would  distinguish  between  the  sale  of  it  for 
medicine  and  the  sale  of  it  as  a  beverage.  I  would  desire  a  place  where 
people  could  go  and  purchase  for  either  purpose. 

Q.  I  should  like  to  ask  you  on  .one  or  two  other  points.  Here  is  a  place 
where  a  man  can  go  and  get  liquor  as  a  beverage.  Suppose  that  the  licensed 
seller  should  think  that  this  man  ought  not  to  have  it ;  what  principle  is  that 
seller  to  judge  upon  ?  How  would  you  regulate  a  license  law  to  make  it 
have  anything  of  a  stringent  character,  and  yet  leave  the  purchaser  to  buy 
just  what  he  pleases  and  just  as  often  as  he  pleases. 

A.     That  is  a  question  of  faith  in  the  licensee. 

Q.  Then  you  would  have  the  licensee  responsible  to  the  man  to  whom  he 
sells  it  ? 

A.  I  should  think  it  would  be  very  easy  to  have  some  general  term  to  fix 
this  matter,  as,  for  instance,  that  the  licensee  should  not  sell  to  any  person 
under  the  influence  of  intoxicating  liquor,  or  to  any  person  that  is  drunk. 


APPENDIX.  81 

Q.  Well,  as  to  the  term  drunk,  we  have  there  a  sliding  scale,  do  we 
not  ?  Precisely  at  what  measure  of  inebriation  will  he  stop  ?  Shall  the 
licensee  judge  when  a  man  has  arrived  at  a  given  point  ? 

A.  He  must  go  upon  his  own  judgment,  and  the  jury,  if  the  case  comes  up 
before  them,  will  judge  of  that  matter  when  it  comes  before  them. 

Q.  I  take  it  that  your  objection  to  the  law  is  that  it  trencHes  somewhat 
upon  the  rights  of  the  individual  by  making  it  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  for 
any  man  to  get  liquor  for  a  beverage ;  and  yet  you  give  a  power  to  the  licensee 
to  say  when  a  purchaser  has  reached  a  point  at  which  he  ought  not  to  drink 
any  more  ?  Do  you  not  lodge  the  power  in  the  licensee  which  you  say 
transcends  the  rights  of  the  individual  when  lodged  in  the  hands  of  the  State  ? 

A.    I  do  not  see  that  it  would. 

Q.  At  what  point  does  a  man  have  a  right  to  say  when  he  has  a  right  to 
take  one  glass  more  ? 

A.  That  is  a  practical  question  that  any  gentleman  can  answer  as  well  as 
myself. 

Q.  Well,  shall  it  be  when  he  can  talk  and  see  and  go,  or  when  he  has  lost 
those  powers  and  faculties  ? 

A.  You  can  put  a  great  many  questions  of  that  kind  that  are  difficult  to 
answer  for  the  simple  reason  that  it  is  a  practical  question  arising  in  each  par- 
ticular case. 

Q.  Does  not  that  practical  difficulty  inhere  in  license  schemes  ?  That  is, 
do  you  not,  at  ever  turn  and  step,  in  every  individual  experience,  involve  that 
very  objection  ? 

A.     Undoubtedly,  sir. 

Q.  And  where  it  involves  that  difficulty,  is  it  possible  to  fix  any  definite 
point  where  you  can  determine  whether  a  man  shall  drink  one  glass  more  or 
not? 

A.  Unquestionably,  in  any  system  of  licensing,  or  of  any  restrictions  that 
are  put  upon  any  traffic,  there  are  points  in  which  there  would  be  constant 
difficulties  occurring,  just  precisely  as  there  are  under  the  present  law.  You 
would  find  that  there  are  difficulties  arising  constantly  in  the  execution  of  the 
present  law. 

Q.  Is  not  a  licensee  under  the  temptation  of  his  profits  to  sell  when  he 
ought  not  to  ? 

A.     I  should  say  so. 

Q.     That  is  a  clear  temptation,  is  it  not  ? 

A.    I  should  say  so. 

Q.  Then,  if  the  licensee  believes  in  his  business,  and  in  the  principle  that 
underlies  his  business,  namely,  the  good  of  alcoholic  beverages,  does  not 
that  fact  disqualify  him  in  judging  of  the  merits-  of  the  question  ? 

A.    If  you  speak  of  tendency,  it  may  have  a  remote  tendency. 

Q.  As  far  as  it  affects  the  man  who  drinks,  is  it  not  clear  that  the  more  he 
approaches  the  point  when  he  ought  not  to  have  another  glass,  the  less  likely 
he  is  to  see  it  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Then  would  there  not  be  a  tendency  to  judge  too  leniently  in  favor  of 
the  person  who  buys  the  liquor  ? 
11 


82  APPENDIX. 

A.  There  is  undoubtedly  a  tendency  in  their  minds  in  this  direction, 
precisely  as  there  is  on  the  other  side  to  judge  too  harshly. 

Q.  Does  that  not  show  how  the  license  system  keeps  open  the  door  for  all 
the  inebriety  that  prevails  at  the  present  time  ? 

A.  Well,  it  keeps  open  the  door  so  far  as  this :  that  it  permits  the  sale  of 
one  glass  of  liquor,  and,  if  the  sale  of  one  glass  of  liquor  tends  to  intoxication 
and  drunkenness,  then,  of  course,  it  leaves  open  the  door  to. inebriety.  In  all 
that  I  have  said  here,  I  repeat  what  I  said  before,  that  I  .would  not  have  an 
open  bar  in  Boston,  nor  in  the  Commonwealth.  I  would  not  have  a  grogery, 
so  to  speak ;  but  I  would  have  those  places  where  people  could  go  and  get,  if 
they  wanted,  good  liquor. 

Q.  If  I  understand  you,  you  desire  that  each  locality  should  be  authorized 
by  a  judicious  license  law,  to  have  places  of  sale,  at  the  option  of  the  citizens. 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  that  the  license  law  shall  be  in  force  in  those  towns  where  the 
people  shall  vote  for  it. 

Q.  Well,  now  suppose  that  the  mass  of  the  towns  of  the  State  should,  with 
great  unanimity,  refuse  to  adopt  the  license  system,  nine  out  of  every  ten 
voters  voting  against  it,  and  yet  that  Boston,  Chelsea,  Lowell,  Lawrence, 
Springfield,  Newburyport,  Salem,  and  a  few  others  of  the  larger  towns  should, 
by  a  bare  majority  or  otherwise,  Tote  for  a  license  system,  do  you  not  think 
it  would  practically  undermine  the  effect  of  the  law  in  the  other  towns  of  the 
Commonwealth,  however  unanimous  they  may  have  voted  for  no  license  ? 

A.  The  inhabitants  of  those  towns  unquestionably  could  go  to  those  who 
are  licensed  in  other  towns  and  buy  liquors. 

Q.     And  it  could  be  sent  to  those  towns  by  express  conveyances  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  Boston  alone  dominates  the  whole  State  in 
this? 

A.    In  the  sense  that  the  larger  place  dominates  the  other  places. 

Q-  Would  not  that  suppression,  according  to  the  will  of  the  majority  in  the 
rural  districts,  be  impracticable,  because  of  this  dominant  influence  of  the 
larger  cities  ? 

A.  It  would  be  a  greater  convenience  for  the  people  in  these  towns  to  send 
to  places  near  them,  than  it  would  be  to  send  to  New  York  and  other  places 
in  the  adjacent  States  where  the  traffic  is  permitted. 

Q.  Should  you  deem  it  a  matter  of  regret  that,  in  the  towns  which  should 
thus  prohibit  licenses,  individuals  would  be  able  to  get  liquor  from  other  towns 
and  cities  ? 

A.  Well,  that  resolves  itself  into  this:  whether  I  should  regret  that  a 
person  who  wishes  to  drink  a  glass  of  liquor  has  an  opportunity  of  gratifying 
his  appetite  in  that  matter.  I  cannot  say  that  I  should  regret  that,  if  he  is  a 
temperate  drinker. 

Q.  So  that  if  the  majority  of  the  voters  in  the  various  towns  should 
decide  in  favor  of  prohibiting  licenses,  you  would  not  regret  it  if  in  such  a 
prohibition  they  should  fail  ? 

A.  I  should  not  say  that.  I  think  there  is  a  distinction  between  the  two 
questions.  One  is  a  question  whether  I  would  regret,  so  far  as  the  individual 
is  concerned,  that  he  should  have  an  opportunity  of  drinking  a  glass  of  liquor 


APPENDIX.  83 

if  he  wished ;  and  the  other  is,  whether  I  wished  that  the  will  of  the  majority 
should  prevail.  I  should  say  that  I  wished  that  the  will  of  the  majority 
should  prevail. 

Q.  Why  the  wish  of  the  majority  of  the  town  any  more  than  that  of  the 
city? 

A.  Because,  as  I  said  at  the  start,  I  think  it  is  a  matter  of  police  regula- 
tion ;  and  that  differs  in  different  places  and  in  different  localities,  in  a 
small  town  in  the  country  there  would  be  different  police  regulations  required 
from  what  there  would  be  in  Boston. 

Q.  Is  there  any  question  of  principle  involved  in  cities  that  there  is  not  in 
small  towns,  in  this  respect  ? 

A.     No,  sir ;  I  do  not  know  -that  there  is. 

Q.  Why  should  there  be  any  difference ;  I  mean  beyond  the  -external 
order  and  form  of  the  labor  of  the  police.  "When  you  come  to  the  principle 
of  that  labor,  what  is  the  difference  between  the  large  places  and  the  small 
places,  as  bearing  upon  the  broad  merits  of  this  question  ? 

A.  So  far  as  the  sale  of  liquor  goes,  it  is  the  same  in  one  place  as  in 
another,  as  to  its  effect  upon  the  individual;  but  then  so  far  as  the  wishes  of 
the  majority  of  the  people  and  the  welfare  and  prosperity  of  the  people  are 
affected,  it  is  for  them  to  decide.  Now  it  is  the  opinion  of  a  great  many  of 
the  people  of  Boston  that  if  hotels  are  not  permitted  to  furnish  alcoholic  and 
fermented  liquors  to  their  guests,  and  if  it  is  to  be  said  out  of  the  Common- 
wealth, in  other  States,  that  the  hotels  are  shut  up  in  Boston,  or  rather  that 
no  liquor  is  to  be  drank  there,  that  system  of  legislation  operates  as  an  injury 
to  Boston.  How  far  that  goes  I  can  only  gather  from  what  other  people  say. 
I  know  that  is  a  prominent  and  general  feeling  among  portions  of  the  business 
community  of  Boston. 

Q.     How  would  you  have  hotels  furnish  liquors  ? 

A.  I  think  that  they  might  furnish  liquor  upon  the  call  of  the  guests  at 
their  table,  if  they  wished,  or  at  their  rooms,  if  they  desired. 

Q.     But  no  room  into  which  they  could  go  for  that  purpose  ? 

A.    It  would  amount  substantially  to  that. 

Q.  Would  it  not  amount  substantially  to  this,  that  it  would  necessarily 
involve  open  bars  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  do  not  think  it  would.  I  mean  by  that  a  place  accessible 
from  the  street,  where  all  persons  might  go  in. 

Q.  I  wish  to  ask  the  question,  if  the  present  prohibitory  law  is  an  infringe- 
ment upon  the  rights  of  citizens,  why  a  restriction  such  as  you  propose, 
authorizing  towns  by  vote  to  exclude  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a 
beverage,  is  not  also  an  infringement  upon  the  rights  of  the  citizens  ? 

A.  That  is,  if  the  restriction  of  the  sale  is  an  infringement,  why  is  not  the 
permission  of  the  sale  an  infringement  ? 

Q.  No.  I  understand  you  that  the  present  prohibitory  law  is  an  infringe- 
ment upon  the  right  of  the  citizen,  as  it  tends  to  exclude  him  from  the  use 
of  intoxicating  liquor. 

A.    I  gave  that  as  an  argument  of  those  in  favor  of  the  license  law. 

Q.     Did  I  understand  you  to  say  that  was  your  opinion  ? 


84  APPENDIX. 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Though  I  did  not  use  the  term  infringement ;  but  I  will 
take  that  term. 

Q.     Why  is  it  not  an  infringement  upon  the  rights  of  the  citizen  ? 

A.  It  is  an  infringement  upon  their  police  regulations  which  they  must 
submit  to  a  vote  of  the  town  ? 

Q.  So  that  the  vote  of  the  town  is  legitimate  and  the  vote  of.  the  State  is 
not  ? 

A.  I  should  be  willing  to  go  that  extent.  There  is  no  difference  between 
the  vote  of  the  State  and  the  vote  of  all  the  towns  substantially.  The  only 
objection,  in  the  case  of  a  law  of  this  character,  is,  that  the  dominant  will  of 
the  State  is  forced  upon  the  town  ;  and  you  avoid  that  difficulty  by  giving  it 
to  the  people  of  the  place  itself  to  determine  by  vote. 

Q.  But  do  you  not  involve  another  difficulty,  the  power  of  criminal  legis- 
lation being  with  the  State,  and  not  with  the  town  ? 

A.  The  power  of  criminal  legislation  is  with  the  State.  But  here  we 
come  back  to  the  difference  of  principle  upon  which  you  and  I  start  from  the 
beginning,  and  that  is,  that  I  do  not  consider  the  temperate  use  of  alcoholic 
drinks  as  a  vice ;  nor  do  I  think  that,  unless  it  is  prohibited  by  law,  that  the 
sale  of  it  is  a  crime. 

(2-  Now,  touching  the  question  of  business,  I  understand  you  to  have 
expressed  the  opinion  of  some  persons,  not  your  own,  that  the  suppression  of 
the  traffic  of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  beverage  should  not  be  applied  in  the 
case  of  hotels.  Do  you  think  that  travellers  as  a  general  thing  select  hotels 
where  liquors  are  sold  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  conversant  with  the  feelings  of  the  merchants,  for  example, 
from  the  distant  sections  of  the  country  on  that  point  ? 

A.  I  have  conversed  with  many,  and  the  opinion  is  uniform.  The  unani- 
mous feeling  that  I  have  heard  in  reference  to  that  point  is  that  even  among 
temperance  men,  (I  mean  those  who  in  conversation  say  that  they  are,  and 
show  no  indication  to  the  contrary,)  as  a  matter  of  preference,  they  would  go 
to  hotels  where  they  knew  that  alcoholic  and  fermented  liquors  could  be  had. 

Q.     Have  you  ever  fallen  in  with  temperance  men  who  do  not  do  that  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  never  have  had  conversation  with  any  gentlemen  who  said 
that  they  did  not  prefer  to  go  to  those  hotels. 

Q.  Will  you  state  broadly  and  in  a  general  way  what  the  result  of  the 
traffic  in  liquors  is  upon  the  wealth  of  the  State,  restricted  or  unrestricted,  so 
far  as  it  is  sold  and  used  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  It  is  much  like  any  article  of  luxury ;  I  suppose  the  general  question 
of  political  economy  would  come  in  there. 

Q.     Is  it  a  gain  or  a  loss  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  it  is  a  gain  or  a  loss.  It  is  a  question  that  I  am 
not  competent  to  answer. 

Q.  Have  you  any  opinion  whether  the  burden  of  taxation  is  increased  by 
the  present  drinking  usages  ? 

A.     I  have  no  doubt  that  it  is  largely. 

Q.     How  much  would  it  be,  in  your  opinion,  in  this  Commonwealth  ? 


APPENDIX.  85 

A.  I  could  not  give  the  percentage.  I  think  a  large  portion  of  the 
criminal  costs  of  the  Commonwealth  arc  from  that  cause.  There  are  very 
few  cases  into  which  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  does  not  more  or  less 
enter. 

Q.  Would  you  be  startled  by  the  statistics  on  that  point  if  they  were  veiy 
large  ? 

A.    No,  sir.     I  have  seen  them. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  people  should  be  taxed  to  pay  the  pauperage 
arising  from  the  drinking  usages  of  society  ?  Would  you  think  it  any  infringe- 
ment if  the  State  should  tax  a  man  to  defray  the  expenses  and  repair  the 
ravages  occasioned  by  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.     Undoubtedly  he  may  think  it  is. 

Q.     As  a  matter  of  principle,  is  it  not  an  infringement  ? 

A.  As  a  matter  of  principle,  an  increase  of  the  burden  of  taxation 
increases  the  infringement. 

Q.  Granting  your  premise,  that  the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages  is  a  good, 
do  you  think  that  the  evils  that  would  be  endured  by  the  absolute  practical 
prohibition  of  them  would  bear  any  comparison  with  the  existing  social  evils 
arising  from  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  beverage,  in  point  of  infringe- 
ment? 

A.  Putting  it  in  that  way,  which  of  the  two  I  would  prefer,  unrestrained 
sale  or  absolute  prohibition,  I  should  prefer  absolute  prohibition. 

Q-     You  would  have  no  question  on  that  point  ? 

A.    Not  the  slightest. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Why  would  you  confine  the  licensed  hotels  to 
any  particular  class  ?  Why  not  extend  it  to  all  hotels  ? 

A .    I  mean  all  reputable  hotels. 

Q.    What  should  constitute  a  reputable  hotel  ? 

A.  Well,  that  is  a  question  that  is  well  understood  here  in  Boston. 
When  I  say  first-class  hotels,  I  do  not  mean  those  that  charge  the  highest 
prices.  I  mean  that  the  guest  of  a  hotel,  whether  he  pays  four  dollars  a  day, 
or  only  a  dollar  and  a  half  per  day,  may  have  the  opportunity,  if  he  deems 
it  a  necessity,  or,  if  it  is  his  custom  to  have  it,  of  having  a  glass  of  liquor. 

Q.  What  is  your  judgment  with  regard  to  the  case  of  applying  the  present 
prohibitory  law  to  the  licensed  dealer  at  those  points  where  he  transcends  the 
privileges  given  to  him  under  the  other  laAv  ? 

A.  I  suppose  the  law  would  be  applied  as  any  law ;  you  can  only  tell  the 
general  principle  where  there  is  some  difficulty.  Supposing  the  licensed 
dealer  should  sell  to  a  person  who  is  intoxicated,  he  should  forfeit  his  license- 
I  do  not  suppose  there  would  be  any  great  difficulty  in  proving  whether  a  man 
was  intoxicated,  any  more  than  there  is  now  in  our  municipal  courts.  If  the 
question  was  as  to  the  sale  of  impure  liquor,  it  might  be  settled  in  the  same 
way  that  it  is  now  in  the  selling  of  adulterated  milk,  for  instance. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  know  that  heretofore  there  has  been  great 
trouble  in  getting  convictions,  because  jurors  have  disagreed  ? 

A .     There  have  been  difficulties. 

Q.  It  has  been  so  difficult,  has  it  not,  that  for  some  years  only  a  few 
convictions  were  obtained  ? 


86  APPENDIX. 

A.     Upon  the  single  matter  of  common  sellers. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  FAY.)  You  stated  in  your  testimony  that  you  would  license 
other  places  than  hotels.  Would  you  allow  the  purchaser  to  drink  that  liquor 
upon  the  premises  ? 

.A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     Then,  would  you  license  eating-houses,  as  they  are  called  ? 

A .     That  would  involve  the  principle  of  eating  at  hotels. 

Q.     Then  you  would  consider  an  eating-house  as,  so  far,  a  hotel  ? 

Q.  Yes,  sir.  If  the  person  went  to  an  eating-house,  I  would  not  object  to 
his  having  wine  with  his  meals. 

Q.     Or  any  other  liquor  ? 

A.     Wine,  or  any  other  liquor. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MCCLELLAN.)  How  many  licenses  would  it  require  for  the 
city  of  Boston  ? 

A.     That  would  be  for  the  commissioners  to  determine. 

Q.  How  many  would  there  be  if  you  licensed  every  hotel  and  eating- 
house  ? 

Q.  I  cannot  give  the  number  of  eating-houses.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that 
I  would  license  every  house. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SWAN.)  I  understand  you  to  say,  that  you  wish  to  remove 
the  prohibitory  law  by  reason  of  its  being  inefficient  with  its  various  instru- 
mentalities ;  and  that  you  place  temperance  in  the  hands  of  the  licensee,  he 
being  a  judge  of  the  sale  of  liquor  to  the  individual,  until  he  has  evidences 
that  that  individual  has  become  drunk  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  was  not  aware  that  I  had  said  that,  nor  anything  bearing 
that  view. 

Mr.  Spooner  submitted  a  motion,  that  the  counsel,  in  behalf  of  the  peti- 
tioners, should  bring  in  a  bill  such  as  was  desired.  It  was,  however,  ruled  by 
the  Committee  that  the  petitioners  could  not  be  asked  to  bring  in  a  bill. 

TESTIMONY  OF  A.  O.  BREWSTER. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  inform  the  Commit- 
tee whether  you  have  had  any,  and  what  .opportunity  in  the  profession  of  the 
law,  and  as  prosecuting  officer  of  the  law,  to  observe  the  operation  and  the 
effect  upon  the  temperance  of  the  community  by  existing  legislation  ? 

A.  From  1855  down  to  1862  I  acted  as  one  of  the  prosecuting  officers  of 
this  county.  The  last  two  years  I  acted  as  the  principal  prosecuting  officer. 

Q.     That  was  during  the  illness  of  the  late  district-attorney  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  during  the  illness  of  the  late  district-attorney,  Mr.  Cooley. 
During  the  greater  portion  of  that  time  it  was  almost  impossible  to  procure 
convictions  under  what  is  called  the  prohibitory  law.  It  was  not  so  difficult 
under  the  license  Act. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  You  mean  under  the  clause  relating  to  common 
sellers  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Under  that  chapter  juries  were  unwilling  to  convict;  my 
own  experience  was  at  that  time,  and  from  my  own  observation,  derived  from 
personal  conversation  with  jurors,  that  the  difficulty  did  not  mainly  arise  from 


APPENDIX.  8? 

men  on  the  jury  engaged  in  the  traffic,  but  that  it  almost  invariably  came 
from  other  parties  who  believed  that  the  laAV  was  arbitrary  and  oppressive, 
and  that  under  other  statutes  of  the  Commonwealth,  juries  had  an  oppor- 
tunity to  judge  of  the  law  as  well  as  the  fact,  the  opinion  of  the  Supreme 
Court  to  the  contrary,  notwithstanding. 

Q.  My  question  was  intended  to  draw  from  you  any  opinion  which  you 
might  have  arrived  at  in  reference  to  the  availability  of  the  present  law,  as 
disclosed  by  its  operations  under  your  eye,  during  the  period  of  time  which 
you  refer  to,  down  to  the  present  time,  in  thei  reduction  of  drunkenness  in 
the  city  of  Boston  ? 

A.  I  think  there  is  more  drunkenness,  by  one-third,  than  when  I  first 
received  my  appointment  as  district-attorney.  I  think  that  the  prosecutions 
for  the  last  two  years  under  the  Maine  Law,  as  it  is  sometimes  called,  have 
failed  to  decrease  the  crime  of  intemperance.  My  own  personal  observation 
and  experience  are  that  for  the  past  six  months,  the  frequency  and  persistency 
with  which  the  State  Constabulary  have  followed  up  the  liquor  dealers,  have 
had  the  effect  of  concealing,  in  some  degree,  the  number  of  places,  but  have 
not  in  the  least  degree  lessened  intemperance.  The  effects  of  prosecution 
have  been  to  drive  certain  parties  from  certain  places,  and  by  so  doing  they 
have  driven  the  liquor  into  more  secret  places ;  and  I  will  illustrate  it  in  this 
way,  which  in  my  judgement  is  a  material  fact.  That  within  the  past  four 
months  I  have  been  consulted  here  in  Boston  by  three  different  men,  profes- 
sionally, as  to  whether  or  not  they  would  have  a  right  to  get  up  organizations 
or  social  clubs,  made  up  of  fifty,  or  more  or  less,  where  each  man  could  have 
his  liquor.  Last  week,  Thursday,  I  was  consulted  by  five  different  men  from 
one  of  the  largest  cities  of  the  Commonwealth  out  of  Boston,  as  to  theii 
rights  under  such  an  organization ;  and  as  to  whether  they  could  be  reached 
by  any  process  of  law,  provided  they  organized  what  they  called  a  social  club 
with  a  constitution  and  by-laws ;  or  whether  they  could  have  a  right  to  drink 
among  themselves. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     What  was  your  counsel  to  those  gentlemen  ? 

A.  My  legal  advice  to  them  was  that  there  was  a  way  which  could  be 
provided  for  evading  the  present  laws  of  the  Commonwealth. 

Q.     How  many  years  were  you  Assistant  District- Attorney  ? 

A .     About  six. 

(2-     Were  you  at  that  time  desirous  of  making  the  law  an  efficient  one  ? 

A.     I  did  my  duty  in  the  place,  I  think,  as  a  prosecuting  officer. 

Q.     Did  you  desire  the  success  of  your  work  ? 

A.  I  never  believed  in  the  law.  I  believed  it  then  as  now,  founded  in 
hypocrisy  and  deceit.  In  addressing  a  jury,  no  man  ever  knew  from  my 
manner  or  mode  of  argument  what  my  personal  and  private  convictions 
were. 

Q.  Do  you  think  you  ever  addressed  a  jury  who  did  not  know  from  the 
various  modes  of  evidence  what  your  opinions  on  the  law  were,  or  what  your 
wishes  were  as  to  their  verdict  ? 

A.  I  have  not  often  addressed  a  jury  where  they  knew  any  more  of  rny 
views  or  of  my  personal  convictions  in  relation  to  the  iaw  than  I  now  know 
what  you  are  going  to  preach  about  next  Sunday. 


88  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  you  ever  addressed  a  jury  were  they  fell  into  the 
mistake  that  you  was  in  favor  of  the  law  itself? 

A.  Every  juryman  whom  I  have  addressed,  knows  that  I  was  in  the  habit 
of  talking  to  them  pretty  earnestly  and  decidedly  in  favor  of  the  vindication 
of  the  law,  and  not  a  word  ever  dropped  from  my  lips  to  indicate  what  my 
personal  convictions  were  in  reference  to  the  operation  of  the  law  before  any 
juror,  nor  before  any  living  judge. 

Q.    Do  you  think  your  answer  covers  the  ground  of  the  question  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  was  no  way  for  the  judge  or  jury  to  know  your 
opinions  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  but  that  at  sometime  the  foreman  of  a  jury  may  have 
known  what  my  convictions  were  in  relation  to  the  law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)  Do  you  think  that  the  system  of  a  license  law 
has  done  anything  to  suppress  the  evil  of  intemperance  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  the  license  law  failed  in  its  operations  so  much  as  the 
present  one.  I  think  it  was  stringent  enough  in  its  character.  I  think  that  a 
license  law  such  as  was  introduced  here  some  years  ago,  and  which  was  drawn 
up  to  some  extent  by  Gen.  Butler,  of  Lowell,  would  have  the  effect  of  lessen- 
ing crime,  and  reducing  intemperance  a  little.  My  own  judgment  is  that 
you  never  can  suppress  intemperance  until  God  in  his  infinite  wisdom  brings 
the  world  to  a  righteous  civilization. 

Q.     Can  you  give  me  the  general  features  of  that  bill  ? 

A .  No,  sir ;  I  have  been  trying  to  recall  the  details,  but  I  cannot ;  but  I 
recollect  that  it  was  full  of  details  and  very  stringent.  There  were  a  good 
many  provisions  and  limitations,  without  which,  I  should  say,  that  a  license 
law  would  be  inoperative  and  void. 

Q.    You  do  not  remember  the  character  of  the  laws  existing  here  twenty- 
five  or  thirty  years  ago  ? 
-  A.    I  have  heard  of  them. 

Q.     Do  you  know  that  they  were  very  stringent  ? 

A.  I  have  only  read  of  them.  I  have  been  told  that  they  were  not  so 
stringent  as  the  one  that  I  refer  to. 

Q.  You  think  that  a  license  law,  enforced  by  the  State  Constabulary, 
could  do  something  ? 

A.  I  think  the  license  system,  under  the  administration  of  the  present 
State  Constabulary,  with  such  provisions  and  limitations  as  should  guard 
against  the  disposition  to  cheat  and  defraud,  would  have  the  effect  of 
producing  a  better  state  of  tilings  than  at  present,  and  would  promote 
good  order  in  the  community. 

Q.     Why  cannot  the  police  of  Boston  carry  out  this  law  just  as  well  ? 

A.     They  can,  if  you  do  not  interfere  with  them. 

Q.  So  that  you  think  that  three  hundred  and  seventy-five  men  would  be 
impeded  in  their  exertions  by  the  exertions  of  about  forty  men  who  make  up 
the  State  Constabulary  ? 

A.  As  long  as  the  State  Constabulary  exists,  I  put  my  argument  upon 
the  ground  that  it  would  be  very  difficult  to  abolish  the  office,  and  therefore, 
the  State  Constabulary  would  still  continue  to  interfere  in  some  degree  with 
the  city  police. 


APPENDIX.  89 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  Do  you  remember  the  evidence  that  you  gave  five 
or  six  years  ago,  on  that  very  point,  before  a  committee  of  the  legislature  ? 

A.     Perfectly  well. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  saying  that  the  jurymen  refusing  to  convict  were  gen- 
erally from  one  to  four  ? 

A,  Yes,  sir  ;  but  when  I  had  occasion  to  try  cases  before  a  jury?  I  never 
found  that  the  influence  against  conviction  (I  mean  in  the  majority  of  cases) 
came  from  those  engaged  in  the  traffic. 

Q.     You  did  not  so  testify  then,  did  you  ? 

A.    I  think  I  did. 

Q.    Is  your  recollection  clear  on  that  point  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is.  I  recollect  the  occasion  very  well,  and  the  room  I  was 
in,  and  gentlemen  who  were  present. 

Q.  How  many  times  have  you  been  before  a  committee  of  the  legislature 
on  this  subject  ? 

A .     I  think  but  once  ;  but  perhaps  twice. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  E.  M.  P.  WELLS. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.    In  Boston,  at  37  Purchase  Street. 

Q.     What  are  your  particular  duties  ? 

A.  I  am  a  clergyman  of  the  Episcopal  Church ;  but  I  am  employed  also  in 
a  mission  to  the  poor  and  to  the  wicked. 

Q.     Is  there  any  institution  that  you  have  charge  of? 

A.  The  St.  Stephen's  House,  where  we  afford  relief  to  a  great  number  of 
people.  I  cannot  hardly  tell  how  many  in  the  course  of  the  year,  but  we  dis- 
tribute several  thousand  dollars  in  the  necessaries  of  life.  As  for  instance,  we 
give  some  thirty  or  forty  thousand  meals  in  the  course  of  the  year ;  and  then 
bread  and  flour  and  meal  and  tea  and  coffee  and  sugar,  etc.,  at  people's 
houses ;  and  in  that  way  we  become  acquainted  with  some  thousands  of  people. 
My  own  congregation,  those  whom  I  officiate  for  and  to  on  Sundays,  are 
a  smaller  number,  and  generally  speaking,  they  are  a  pretty  temperate 
people. 

Q.  Do  your  duties  require  you  to  circulate  pretty  freely  among  the  poor 
in  that  part  of  the  city  ? 

A .  That  is  my  chief  business,  and  occupies  more  of  my  time  than  anything 
else. 

Q.  What  are  your  observations  in  reference  to  the  temperance  or  intem- 
perance of  this  class  of  people  ? 

A .  If  you  will  pardon  me,  I  will  say  first,  that  I  have  been  always  a  very 
strong  friend  of  temperance,  and  I  have  seen  the  necessity  of  absolutely 
abstaining  from  the  use  of  liquors ;  and,  if  I  could,  sir,  make  any  sacrifice, 
even  of  life,  if  it  was  my  duty,  I  would  make  it  for  the  sake  of  putting  an 
end  to  this  horrible  traffic  down  among  the  poor,  those  whose  only  luxuries 
(I  mean  among  a  great  many  of  them)  are  rum  and  tobacco.  They  resort  to 
them,  and  it  does  make  very  sad  work  among  them.  You  do  not  realize  it. 
Up-town  people  do  not  know  of  the  starving,  and  the  freezing,  and  the 

12 


90  APPENDIX. 

quarrels,  and  the  beating  of  wives,  and  the  turning  out-doors  of.  children,  and 
that  wretched  suffering  which  would  make  almost  any  man  do  anything  to 
stop  it. 

Q.  What  is  the  condition  of  drunkenness  or  temperance  at  the  present 
time,  as  compared  with  previous  times  ? 

A.  Well,  I  can  remember,  sir,  ever  since  some  fifteen  years  ago,  when  a 
change  took  place  in  our  laws.  The  sale  of  liquor  has  been  on  the  increase 
since  then,  both  in  the  number  of  .drinking-places,  and  in  the  number  of  per- 
sons obtaining  drink. 

Q .  Is  there  any  particular  cause,  that  you  attribute  this  to  ?  Is  there  any- 
thing in  the  manner  in  which  they  get  it  and  keep  it  ? 

A.  Oh,  they  can  get  it  well  enough.  Liquor  is  kept  in  many  places; 
sometimes  it  is  in  the  cellar,  and  sometimes  in  the  back-room.  They  know 
where  to  go  for  it,  and  do  go  for  it,  and  get  it.  It  is  not  necessary  to  put  up 
a  sign  "  Rum  at  three  cents  a  glass."  They  know  where  to  get  it,  and  they 
will  get  it.  Even  after  the  efforts  of  the  State  Constabulary,  I  am  afraid  they 
have  not  made  any  difference  among  us.  Among  a  more  respectable  class  of 
people,  perhaps  they  may  have  stopped  it  to  some  extent ;  I  do  not  know. 

Q.  Have  you  noticed  the  fact  of  people  carrying  in  quantities  into  their 
houses  ? 

A.  Oh,  frequently,  frequently.  And  in  regard  to  the  sale,  if  people  think 
an  officer  is  coming  about,  they  will  have  nothing  but  the  healthful  groceries 
which  are  usually  kept,  but  they  have  got  a  bottle  in  their  closets,  which  are 
at  the  next  door,  as  they  usually  live  in  the  same  house  ;  and  before  that  bottle 
is  out,  Jim  or  Sam  is  sent  to  get  another  bottle  full,  and  this  process  is  kept 
up  all  day  long  in  that  way. 

Q.  It  is  a  fact,  is  it  not,  that  the  liquor  is  carried  more  into  the  dwelling- 
houses  of  late  ? 

A.  Oh,  yes,  sir.  The  trouble  is,  that  they  do  not  give  our  people  good 
grog.  I  should  think  that  if  you  could  destroy  this  base  evil,  it  would  destroy 
one-half  the  evil  connected  with  the  sale  of  liquor.  It  is  poisonous  stuff,  and 
they  can  get  it  so  cheap  ;  and  they  not  only  get  drunk,  but  that  which  comes 
after  it,  the  delirium  tremens,  is  worse  than  anything  that  I  have  been  able  to 
observe  before. 

A.  Have  you  noticed,  as  a  fact  connected  with  the  increase  of  intemper- 
ance, that  it  extends  also  to  women  and  children  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  but  there  has  been  more  of  an  increase  among  the 
women  than  among  the  men. 

Q.  But  is  there  not  an  increase  in  the  number  of  women  who  are  intem- 
perate ?  Do  not  the  women  and  children  get  drunk  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  and  the  men  do  too.  Sometimes  the  man  is  the  drinker  of 
the  family,  and  sometimes  the  woman,  and  sometimes  both.  Sometimes  one 
begins  and  then  gets  the  other  into  it ;  and  they  both  go  on  like  husband  and 
wife,  one  body  and  one  bottle. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  if  you  were  engaged  in  your  duties 
at  the  time  of  the  old  license  system,  fifteen  years  ago  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  I  was. 


APPENDIX.  91 

Q.  What  has  been  your  observation  since  that  system  went  out  of  use,  as 
to  the  progress  of  intemperance  in  your  district,  and  the  number  of  places 
where  liquor  was  to  be  obtained,  and  the  amount  drank  ? 

A.  As  I  have  just  stated,  it  was  since  that  time,  or  about  that  time,  that 
it  has  been  on  the  increase.  I  do  not  say  that  it  was  owing  to  the  system  of 
laws,  but  that  was  the  aspect  of  things.  Within  six  months  after  the  city 
government  had  refused  all  licenses,  and  people  were  told  that  they  could  not 
sell,  you  could  observe  places  springing  up  here  and  there,  perhaps  five  or  six 
right  along  together. 

Q.  How  is  it  now  as  to  the  actual  fact  as  to  the  number  of -places  in  your 
district,  compared  with  that  of  other  times  ? 

A.  ALout  four  or  five  times  the  number,  as  well  as  I  can  judge.  They 
sell,  but  they  do  not  sell  so  large  a  quantity.  What  ten  would  do  before,  is 
divided  between  seventy  or  a  nundred  now,  and  they  sell  on  a  smaller 
scale ;  they  sell  now  by  the  glass. 

Q.     Has  there  been  any  diminution  in  the  amount  sold  generally  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  as  to  that.  I  should  think  not.  I  cannot  see  how  so 
many  should  get  drunk  so  much,  unless  it  is  more  poisonous. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  have  kept  minutes  by  which  you  can  form  an 
estimate  as  to  this  ? 

A.     No,  I  have  not ;  it  is  from  my  observation. 

Q.  Supposing  you  were  to  testify  to  the  matter  of  fact. on  that  point.  Sup- 
pose this  were  a  court  of  justice.  Should  you  feel  at  liberty  to  say  that  the 
number  of  places  is  greater  ? 

A.  Why,  I  would,  if  I  have  got  any  sense  of  observation  about  it ;  I 
believe  it  most  fully.  I  cannot  state  that  such  a  man's  name  is  John  Jones, 
but  I  believe  it  to  be  because  he  has  told  me  so. 

Q,  Do  you  mean  to  say  that,  in  your  testimony  so  far,  you  have  that  evi- 
dence ? 

A.  No,  sir;  they  do  not  come  to  me  to  make  confessions  of  that  kind, I 
warrant  you. 

Q.     But  you  think  that  the  sale  has  increased  ? 

A.     I  never  made  any  particular  calculations  in  regard  to  it. 

Q.     How  does  the  population  of  Boston  compare  with  what  it  was  ? 

A.  You  can  tell  that  better  than  I  can.  In  my  own  locality,  I  should 
think  the  population  was  about  the  same  at  the  time  I  have  been  speaking  of 
as  it  is  now.  Commerce  is  driving  out  some  of  the  population  and  building 
up  storehouses  ;  but  that  class  of  the  population  I  should  think  would  be  about 
the  same.  I  do  not  think  it  has  increased,  because  commerce  has  crowded 
out  a  good  deal  of  the  population. 

Q>  You  speak  of  having  procured  men  to  abstain  from  liquors.  Do  you 
mean  giving  them  pledges  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  most  solemn  pledges. 

Q.     You  are  yourself  a  pledged  abstainer  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  am  not.  I  have  offered  frequently  to  other  people,  to  pledge 
myself  to  abstain,  if  they  would  abstain  ;  but  they  said  that  they  would 
pledge  themselves  without  my  doing  so  ;  and  I  have  never  found  it  necessary 


92  APPENDIX. 

to  do  so  yet.     God  has  been  pleased  to  give  me  sense  and  resolution  enough 
to  abstain,  and  in  His  kindness  has  kept  me  along  in  it  thus  far. 

Q.    You  say  you  have  never  found  it  necessary  ?    You  mean  what  ? 

A.  I  think  that  when  a  person  gets  in  the  way  of  drinking,  his  best  way 
is  to  cut  off  entirely.  I  have  never  found  it  necessary. 

Q.  I  should  like  to  ask  you  whether  you  think  a  man's  personal  influence 
to  lead  a  man  to  abstain  totally,  is  as  good  as  if  he  himself  were  an  abstainer  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is,  sir,  really;  but  I  cannot  say.  I  do  not  know  whether 
these  people  whom  I  have  pledged  know  that  I  am  not  in  the  habit  of  drink- 
ing. I  do  not  have  it  upon  my  table.  I  have  had  it  ordered  by  physicians 
two  or  three  times ;  and  the  order  has  been  made  peremptory  by  some  of  our 
best  physicians ;  but  I  do  not  think  I  am  what  would  be  called  a  drinking 
man  at  all ;  if  so  I  cannot  help  it. 

Q.  Do  you  feel  that  the  execution  of  the  existing  prohibitory  law  would 
be  an  evil  in  the  neighborhood  of  which  you  speak  ? 

A.    I  would  give  a  good  deal  if  it  could  be  done. 

Q.     You  do  not  see  any  evil  effect  from  the  execution  of  it  ? 

A.  It  would  not  be  immediate;  I  do  not  know  what  it  would  be  as  a 
precedent. 

Q.     Have  you  read  the  report  of  the  State  Constabulary  ? 

A.  I  have  not  read  it  with  exactness.  I  presume  they  have  done  a  great 
deal  of  good. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  I  understand  you  to  be  in  this  state  of  mind : 
you  see  the  evils  of  intemperance  to  be  very  great,  and  you  do  not  see  them 
diminished,  or  at  least  you  do  not  see  them  removed  under  the  present  state 
of  things,  and  therefore  you  hope  the  state  of  things  can  be  improved  under 
some  kind  of  a  license  law  ? 

A.    I  do,  sir. 

Q.  How  would  it  be  as  to  suppressing  the  sale  by  any  license  law,  supposing 
that  a  hundred  men  were  licensed  in  this  city  ? 

A.  I  will  answer  your  question  as  the  Yankee  does,  by  asking  another.  I 
would  ask  you  if  you  do  not  see  that  if  fifty  or  a  hundred  (or  as  many  as  the 
legislature  should  think  best)  were  licensed  to  sell  good  spirits,  and  they 
were  rigidly  bound  and  compelled,  by  constant  weekly  investigation,  to  sell 
nothing  but  pure  spirits,  it  would  be  a  great  privilege,  pecuniarily,  to  them  ? 
I  cannot  say  whether  it  would  do  any  good  or  not ;  but  would  they  not  be  so 
much  of  a  powerful  police  ?  Would  it  not  be  for  their  interest  to  see  that 
others  did  not  sell,  who  were  not  licensed  ?  I  answer  the  question  in  that  way. 

Q.    But,  supposing  that  they  are,  how  are  they  going  to  enforce  the  law  ? 

A.  They  have  the  police  of  the  city,  and  the  State  Constabulary,  and  if 
they  are  not  numerous  enough,  they  can  have  more  appointed. 

Q.  You  say  that  some  fifteen  years  ago,  under  the  license  law,  there  were 
not  so  many  sales  as  at  present,  under  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir ;  there  is  no  question  about  it. 

Q.    What  date  should  you  give  to  that  time  when  they  were  so  few  ? 

A.  Somewhere  about  fifteen  years  ago ;  I  cannot  give  the  precise  date.  I 
remember  of  having  been  inquired  of,  by  a  gentleman  who  was  in  the  legis- 
lature at  the  time  this  matter  came  up  before  it,  before  a  vote  was  taken,  as 


APPENDIX.  93 

to  what  my  advice  would  be ;  and  it  was  the  only  time  we  ever  differed  on  a 
matter  of  that  kind,  and  on  this  we  did  differ  pointedly. 

Q.  Shall  you  be  surprised  when  I  tell  you  that  there  have  boen  no  licenses 
in  Boston,  with  the  exception  of  nine  months,  for  twenty-five  years  ? 

A.    You  know  better  on  that  subject  than  I  do ;  I  should  be  surprised. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Suppose  that  there  should  be  a  license  system  in 
which  the  supervision  that  you  have  referred  to  should  take  effect,  w.ould 
there  be  any  inclination  on  the  part  of  these  people  to  go  to  these  low  and 
furtive  places,  if  they  could  get  the  liquor  at  the  open  places  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  there  would  be,  for  the  reason  that 'they  could  get  it  for  a 
third  or  a  half  of  the  price ;  but  if  the  license  law  were  established  they  could 
not  get  it  in  these  places  so  much. 

Q.     Would  it  be  ferreted  out  of  these  places  ? 

A.  I  think  there  is  no  question  about  it  at  all.  I  should  think  it  could  be 
rooted  out  almost  wholly.  They  would  get  it,  I  suppose,  somewhat,  but  they 
would  be  then  obliged  to  get  something,  if  they  got  any,  that  would  be  better. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  of  any  case  under  the  license  system,  where  the 
unlicensed  were  suppressed  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  of  any  case. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  J.  A.  BOLLES,  D.  D. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  your  position, 
and  in  what  your  ministry  consists  ? 

A.  I  am  rector  of  the  Church  of  the  Advent,  whicii  is  a  parish  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  in  this  city,  on  Bowdoin  Street.  My  parish  is  a 
free  church,  and  we  have,  consequently,  a  large  number  of  persons  connected 
with  us,  perhaps  from  fifteen  hundred  to  two  thousand,  who  look  to  us  for 
whatever  ministrations  they  require. 

Q.  What  opportunity  does  this  ministration  afford  you  to  observe  the  con- 
dition of  the  lower  and  poorer  classes  ? 

A.  We  are  thrown  more  or  less  in  contact  with  the  poorer  classes;  and 
yet  I  do  not  think  the  very  poorest,  or  the  same  class  of  persons  with  whom 
Dr.  Wells  is  accustomed  to  minister.  My  parish  being  a*- free  parish,  both 
rich  and  poor  attend,  and  yet  not  a  great  many  who  may  be  called  very  poor. 

Q.  I  would  inquire,  from  your  observation  for  the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years 
in  connection  with  your  position,  as  to  the  advance  or  retrograde  of  intem- 
perance and  drunkenness  ? 

A.  As  far  back  as  1834  or  '35, 1  was  very  much  interested  in  the  temper- 
ance cause,  and  delivered  a  good  many  temperance  lectures  upon  what  was 
then  the  temperance  platform ;  and  then  when  the  subject  came  to  interest 
the  minds  of  politicians,  and  the  matter  became  a  subject  of  law  and  compul- 
sion, from  that  time  to  the  present,  I  have  not  any  doubt  that  intemperance 
has  very  much  increased ;  nor  have  I  any  doubt  that  the  public  mind  is 
demoralized  upon  the  whole  subject.  I  think  it  has,  for  instance,  demoralized 
the  public  mind,  by  giving  a  false  standard  of  morality;  and  I  doubt  if  there 
can  be  any  greater  injury  to  rood  morals  than  the  setting  up  of  false  standards 
of  morality. 

Q.    Will  you  explain  a  little  at  that  point  ? 


94  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  mean,  for  instance,  that  the  use  of  ardent  spirits,  as  a  beverage,  is 
not  always  a  sin  per  se,  nor  is  the  selling  of  it  always  a  sin ;  and  when  you 
say  they  are,  you  violate  the  truth,  nor  does  the  public  conscience  respond  to 
any  such  interpretation  of  what  is  right  and  what  is  wrong.  I  have  lamented 
that  the  temperance  question  has  been  taken  out  of  the  power  of  the  church 
and  of  the  gospel,  and  made  a  subject  of  politics  and  of  prohibitory  laws. 

Q.  Will  you  state  whether,  in  your  intercourse  with  men,  that  false  system 
has  had  any  effect  in  preventing  the  thinking,  quiet  portion  of  the  community 
from  joining  in  this  movement  ? 

A .  It  has  prevented  many  from  actual  sense  of  duty.  A  man  could  not 
go  into  that  without  violating  his  sense  of  duty. 

Q.  Has  there  been  any  influence  in  withdrawing  from  strong  and  from 
actual  co-operation,  many  among  the  respectable,  religious  portion  of  the 
community  with  whom  you  have  associated  ? 

A.    I  have  not  any  doubt  of  it. 

Q.  How  does  the  co-operation  of  that  portion  of  community  compare  with 
what  it  was  from  1325  to  1835  ? 

A.  Well,  my  memory  would  not  go  back  so  far  as  1825  in  respect  to  this 
subject. 

Q.     How  was  it  from  1830  to  1850  ? 

A.  In  1834  or  1835  I  remember  very  well;  and  I  think  the  drinking  hab- 
its were  not  only  much  affected  but  entirely  controlled :  and  the  same  drink- 
ing habits  have  now  returned.  I  speak  of  people  having  liquor  on  their  tables. 

Q.  Was  it  or  not  a  fact,  sir,  in  the  period  to  which  you  allude  (1834  or 
1835,)  down  to  1845,  that  the  clergy  of  all  denominations  took  an  active  part 
in  the  cause  of  temperance  ? 

A.    I  think  they  did. 

Q.    How  is  it  now  ?    Do  they  take  the  same  part  now  that  they  did  then  ? 

A.    I  do  not  believe  they  do,  sir. 

Q.    What  is  the  reason  ? 

A.  I  think  they  cannot  conscientiously  enter  into  the  temperance  move- 
ment, as  it  is  carried  on  now,  because  if  they  do  they  must  become  politicians. 

Q.  Is  not  the  moral  opinion  of  the  community  greatly  weakened  in  the 
way  of  standing  behind  the  enforcement  of  any  law  ?  Js  there  the  same 
public  sentiment  now  as  there  was  then  ? 

Q.    No^  sir ;  not  in  regard  to  any  law. 

Q.  Was  this  change  owing  to  the  better  part  of  community  or  to  the 
liquor-sellers  ? 

A.    I  think  it  never  had  anything  to  do  with  the  liquor-sellers. 

Q.  Can  you  form  an  opinion  how  great  that  change  was,  from  1835  to 
1845,  in  withholding  any  active  aid  in  the  cause  of  temperance  ? 

A.  It  seems  to  me  that  there  is  scarcely  any  of  the  same  kind  of  influence 
existing  now  with  that  class  of  clergy  which  formerly  existed  upon  that 
subject. 

Q.    Is  this  difference  confined  to  any  particular  denomination  ? 

A.    I -do  not  think  it  is,  sir. 

Q.  How  is  your  opinion  with  regard  to  that  from  your  acquaintance  with 
the  denominations  out  of  Boston  and  with  the  clergymen  out  of  Boston  ? 


APPENDIX.  95 

A.  I  am  not  much  acquainted  with  the  different  denominations.  With 
my  own  I  think  there  is  not  the  same  interest  felt  on  the  subject  that  there 
was  fifteen  or  twenty  years  ago. 

Q.  Supposing  that  there  were  a  proper  license  law,  by  which  the  sale 
should  be  regulated  and  controlled,  and  the  present  law  left  in  force  to  break 
up  unlicensed  places,  would  there  come  to  the  cause  of  temperance,  in  your 
judgment,  a  moral  support  and  aid  from  the  religious  portion  of  the  commu- 
nity to  which  you  allude  ? 

A.    I  think  there  would. 

Q.  I  understand  your  opinion  to  be  that  some  law  of  this  kind  would  be 
better  than  the  present  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;  that  is  my  opinion. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  Is  the  general  tenor  of  your  answers  based  upon 
the  doctrine  of  total  abstinence  or  of  moderate  use  ? 

A.  It  is  not  based  upon  the  doctrine  of  total  abstinence  as  a  necessity  for 
any  individual. 

Q.    Nor  as  a  duty  ? 

A.    Nor  as  a  duty. 

Q.  Do  you  recognize  no  duty  to  abstain  from  liquors  as  a  beverage,  with 
reference  to  the  general  public  welfare,  unless  the  drinking  of  a  glass  is  a  sin 
per  se  ? 

A.  My  own  opinion  in  reference  to  that  matter  is,  that  the  motive  of 
doing  good  to  our  fellow-men,  and  of  saving  souls,  in  consequence  of  what  has 
been  done  for  us,  is  a  thousand  times  more  effectual  than  any  prohibitory  law 
can  possibly  be. 

Q.  Do  you  take  the  ground  that  the  individual  physical  good  of  a  man  in 
health  requires  alcoholic  beverages  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  have  nothing  to  do  with  that. 

Q.    Do  you  mean  that  you  reject  that  doctrine  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  do  not  know  anything  at  all  about  it.  That  is  a  subject 
that  physicians  could  testify  to  better  than  I  could. 

Q.  You  neither  affirm  nor  deny  the  utility  of  alcoholic  beverages  to  a  man 
in  health  ? 

A .    No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  recognize  an  indescribable  amount  of  misery  as  growing  from 
the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A .  I  do  not ;  that  is,  if  I  understand  your  question.  If  you  put  in  this  way ; 
do  you  recognize  a  great  amount  of  misery  as  growing  from  the  intemperate 
and  excessive  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  beverage  ? — I  should  say  yes. 

Q.  Then  since  you  do  admit  an  indescribable  amount  of  misery  as  arising 
from  the  intemperate  use  of  liquors,  and  since  you  are  not  prepared  to  affirm 
the  utility  of  their  use  as  a  beverage,  why  do  you  plead  here  for  a  license 
law  as  against  prohibition  ? 

A.  Because  I  think  it  is  a  great  deal  better  for  the  end  to  be  accom- 
plished. I  mean  to  say  that  your  prohibition  only  increases  the  evil ;  it  leads 
to  more  drinking,  and  demoralizes  the  community  on  the  question  of  drunk- 
enness as  a  sin.  Drunkenness  is  not  the  worst  of  all  crimes  nor  the  fountain  of 
all  sins.  I  doubt  if  it  is  as  demoralizing  as  the  selling  of  bad  books  or  the 
preaching  of  bad  sermons. 


96  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Now  might  it  not  be  that  the  disseminating  of  bad  literature,  or  indeed 
the  preaching  of  bad  sermons,  would  have  the  same  effect  ? 

A.  A  sermon  that  denies  the  accountability  of  man  and  a  future  judg- 
ment, is  a  very  bad  sermon,  and  saps  the  foundation  of  all  religion. 

Q.    Will  you  explain  the  platform  of  the  time  you  speak  of. 

A.  I  suppose  it  was  a  platform  by  which  individuals  made  a  pledge  or 
promise  to  abstain  from  the  use  of  ardent  spirits  as  a  beverage. 

Q.    It  permitted  the  drinking  of  fermented  liquors,  did  it  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  and  at  the  same  time  the  enforcement  of  the  pledge  was 
based  upon  moral  and  religious  considerations. 

Q.  Have  you  or  your  brethren  ever  been  engaged  in  any  other  temperance 
movement  than  that  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  cannot  speak  of  my  brethren.  I  can  speak  for  myself  in 
reference  to  that  matter.  I  have  never  advocated  it  upon  any  other  ground 
than  that  of  abstinence. 

Q.  You  have  never  been  engaged  with  the  temperance  movement  as  that 
cause  has  been  defined  and  generally  understood  for  the  last  thirty  years  ? 

A.    No,  sir  ;  I  have  not. 

Q.  I  understand  you  that  your  people  were  heartily  engaged  then  in  the 
temperance  movement.  Do  you  recollect  a  period  at  any  time  when  the 
leading  families  of  your  church  did  not  have  liquors  on  their  sideboard  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  do  not  think  the  leading  families  had  it  on  their  tables 
then.  I  am  sure  they  do  not  now. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  any  period  thirty-five  years  ago,  or  at  any  other 
time,  when  the  leading  families  of  your  communion  did  not  use  liquors  and 
have  them  in  their  sideboard  ? 

A.  I  should  say  that  my  own  impression  is,  that  the  cause  of  temperance 
was  very  much  thrown  back  by  the  extreme  measures  taken  by  temperance 
men  at  that  time.  When  the  temperance  reformation  commenced,  undoubt- 
edly the  drinking  habits  of  the  community  were  very  universal,  and  liquor 
was  more  or  less  upon  the  sideboards  everywhere. 

Q.  And  that  was  the  case  among  the  leading  families  of  your  communion 
thirty  years  ago  ? 

A.  I  can  hardly  say  that.  But  as  early  as  1835  there  had  been  a  vast 
change  produced. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  there  is  more  liquor  drank  among  the  leading 
families  of  your  communion  than  there  was  thirty  years  ago  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir  ;  I  think  it  is  so. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  give  as  a  reason  against  the  law,  that  when  it 
came  into  politics,  which  is,  I  suppose,  when  they  began  to  get  it  into  the 
legislature,  the  interests  of  the  clergy  subsided.  Do  you  remember  any  time 
when  it  was  not  known  in  the  elections  what  sort  of  a  law  was  favored,  and 
when  people  were  not  elected  on  the  question  as  to  whether  they  were  right 
on  this  subject  ? 

A.  I  have  really  very  little  recollection  about  that  subject,  being  very 
little  of  a  politician  myself. 

Q.  In  the  early  portions  of  the  temperance  movement,  you  state  that  the 
ministers  of  the  various  denominations  aided  largely  in  the  advancement  of 


APPENDIX.  97 

the  cause,  but  that  there  has  been  a  demoralization  since  the  enactment  of 
the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.    I  think  that  is  so. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  the  position  held  by  the  Methodist  clergy  upon  this 
subject  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  know  whether  they  are  for  or  against  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.    No,  sir;  I  do  not  know. 

Q.     How  do  you  state,  then,  in  reference  to  the  opinions  of  the  clergy  ? 

A.  I  speak  merely  of  my  impression.  I  occasionally  meet  clergymen  of 
the  other  denominations,  and  I  scarcely  ever  meet  any  among  them  who  do 
not  occasionally  drink  a  glass  of  wine  ;  and  I  do  not  think  they  are  gener- 
ally in  favor  of  an  extreme  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  that  you  do  not  desire  to  see  the  sale  of  liquor 
suppressed  ? 

A.  I  did  not  say  that.  That  is  a  matter  for  the  legislature  to  determine. 
I  would  not  have  it  suppressed  by  an  improper  law,  because  the  effect  of 
such  a  law  would  be  a  great  deal  more  of  an  injury  than  the  sale. 

Q.    How? 

A.     By  the  demoralization  of  mankind. 

Q.  You  think  the  operation  of  the  present  law  would  be  to  demoralize 
mankind  ? 

A.  The  question  is,  whether  I  believe  that  the  successful  execution  of  the 
present  prohibitory  law  to  suppress  drunkenness  would  still  demoralize  the 
community  in  its  operation.  It  is  a  question  involving  a  just  discrimination. 
As  I  said  before,  if  you  were  to  ask  the  question  in  reference  to  any  other 
impossible  thing,  it  would  be  precisely  the  same.  You  ask  me  if  the  success- 
ful execution  of  the  prohibitory  liquor  law  suppressing  drunkenness  would 
demoralize  the  community.  In  the  first  place,  I  take  the  ground  that  it  can- 
not be  successfully  executed,  and,  therefore,  I  cannot  answer  your  question. 

Q.     Then,  do  you  hope,  through  the  license  law,  to  suppress  drunkenness  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  that  I  do ;  I  cannot  suppose  it.  I  believe  that  the  law  of 
the  gospel  and  love  of  the  gospel  will  do  a  thousand  times  more  than  all  the 
laws  of  the  State  that  can  be  formed. 

Q.  You  do  not  rely  upon  the  law,  then,  to  aid  temperance  or  suppress 
intemperance  ? 

A.  As  one  instrument.  I  have  no  doubt  that  there  ought  to  be  a  license 
law  regulating  the  sale,  and  so  far  I  should  depend  upon  the  law ;  but  when 
you  depend  upon  the  law  for  the  cure  of  this  evil  entirely,  and  for  the  sup- 
pression of  drunkenness,  I  think  it  is  impossible. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  admit  the  exigency  of  any  law,  whether  of 
the  prohibitory  law  in  its  present  form,  or  of  the  license  law,  as  an  auxiliary 
of  the  suppression  of  intemperance  ? 

A.    I  certainly  do. 

Q.     But  yon  would  prefer  the  license  system  ? 

A.    I  think  it  would  be  something  better  suited  to  the  end  desired. 

Q..    Why? 

A.    Because  it  is  based  on  the  good  sense  of  the  community. 

13 


98  APPENDIX. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  JOHN  POWER. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Be  kind  enough  to  state  to  the  Committee  what 
is  your  profession  and  where  it  is  pursued  ? 

A.  I  am  a  Catholic  priest,  a  pastor  of  a  church  in  Worcester ;  pastor  also 
of  another  church  in  Millbury,  and  of  another  in  Grafton. 

Q.     Alone,  or  with  assistance  ? 

A.     With  one  assistant — my  brother. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  lived  in  Worcester  ? 

A .     Ten  years. 

Q.  In  the  pursuit  of  your  ministry,  have  you  had  any  opportunity  to  form 
an  opinion  concerning  the  effect  of  the  existing  legislation  of  Massachusetts 
upon  the  temperance  or  intemperance  of  the  people  ?  If  so,  please  to  state 
what  that  opinion  is  ? 

A.  I  have  had  an  opportunity  to  form  an  opinion  on  that  subject,  and 
have,  at  present,  an  absolute  opinion.  That  is,  I  can  state  the  present  facts 
and  their  circumstances  and  bearings ;  but  I  could  scarcely  tell  of  them  in 
comparison  with  the  effects  under  the  legislation  of  twenty  or  thirty,  or  even 
fifteen  years  ago. 

Q.  What  is  the  aggregate  population  of  the  churches  wkich  come  within 
your  cure  ? 

A.  Our  churches  are  not  divided  geographically.  There  are  something 
like  eleven  or  twelve  thousand  souls  in  Worcester.  I  have  a  parish  of 
probably  two  thousand  in  Millbury,  and  in  Grafton  some  twelve  hundred. 

Q.  Be  kind  enough  to  give  to  the  Committee  those  positive  facts,  so  far  as 
you  possess  them,  and  your  opinions  as  you  have  formed  them  ? 

A.  1  will  begin  by  admitting  that  drunkenness  is  a  great  evil.  Also,  at 
the  same  time,  that  I  think  it  is  on  the  increase ;  also,  that  one  of  the  reasons 
why  it  is  on  the  increase  is  from  the  fact  that  liquor  is  obtained  in  places  and 
in  a  manner  that  would  rather  gratify  a  man's  feeling  for  breaking  the  law. 
I  have  seen  times  and  places,  I  think,  when  laws  were  broken  for  the  sake  of 
breaking  them,  to  show  a  man's  independence.  I  should  also  begin  by  stating 
that  I  am  a  temperance  man.  As  a  priest,  I  am  obliged  to  preach  temperance 
doctrines,  and  always  have  done  so.  I  have  also  delivered  temperance  addresses 
before  societies.  But  I  make  a  wide  distinction  between  temperance  and  total 
abstinence.  I  wish  that  distinction  to  be  borne  in  mind  decidedly.  I  should, 
by  no  means,  wish  to  be  considered  as  testifying  for  the.  rum  side  of  the  ques- 
tion. I  use  that  expression,  because  it  gives  the  idea  I  wish  to  convey  in  one 
word.  I  say  that  in  my  opinion — and  I  am  but  a  young  man  and  have  not 
had  much  experience — this  drawing  a  right  line  between  temperance,  as  I 
understand  it,  and  total  abstinence,  has  been  the  cause  of  throwing  out  a 
great  many  friends  from  the  temperance  cause.  I  do  not  think  that  man  a 
temperance  man  who  totally  abstains  from  the  use  of  liquor.  I  think  he 
should  be  called  a  total  abstinence  man.  I  think  a  man  has  a  right  to  judge 
for  himself.  But,  at  the  same  time,  I  would  say  that,  though  I  drink  liquor,  I 
still  call  myself  a  temperance  man,  if  I  do  not  exceed  the  bounds  of  modera- 
tion. I  think  the  community  feel  that  a  law  which  tells  a  man  that  he  shall 
not  sell,  is  an  unjust  attempt  to  control  him.  I  call  it  despotism.  If  I  were  a 
legislator,  I  should  throw  my  vote  against  such  a  law  as  the  present  one,  on 


APPENDIX.  99 

the  ground  that  I  had  no  right,  as  a  legislator,  to  impose  a  law  upon  a  man  or 
a  community  that  would  take  away  certain  rights  which  should  not  be  taken 
away.  As  a  citizen  or  an  individual,  I  have  a  right  to  sell  or  drink,  limited 
by  the  bounds  of  moderation.  I  have  no  right  to  sell  or  drink  beyond  -the 
bounds  of  moderation.  Up  to  that  point,  I  think  no  one  can  interfere  with 
my  rights,  without  playing  the  part  of  a  despot. 

Q.  What  have  you  observed  to  be  the  moral  effect  of  this  legislation  upon 
the  people  of  your  charge  ?  And  I  will  take  the  great  body  of  people  in 
humble  life  and  of  the  least  education,  and  therefore  those  most  likely  to  be 
misled  ? 

A.  At  the  same  time,  you  will  not  oblige  me  to  throw  out  those  who  are 
not  of  my  charge  ? 

Q.     It  covers  those  who  are  not  of  your  flock  as  well  as  them,  does  it  not  ? 

A.  My  opinion  of  this  legislation  is  that,  it  being  an  infringement  upon  a 
man's  right  and  liberty,  men  will  openly  violate  the  law  almost  for  the  sake  of 
the  pleasure  of  doing  so.  When  they  are  told  they  cannot  drink  when  they 
are  dry,  they  feel  that  they  have  a  right  to  drink  or  not,  if  they  see  fit. 
Therefore,  when  the  law  undertakes  to  say  they  shall  not  drink,  they  say  they 
will  drink.  Moreover,  the  legislation  now  not  allowing  even  respectable 
places  to  keep  liquors,  the  consequence  is  that  liquors  are  obtained  in  private, 
of  that  quality  and  in  that  manner  that  very  sad  consequences  do  and  must 
flow  therefrom.  I  have  known  cases  where  men  have  gone  into  certain 
places  where  liquor  was  sold,  with  a  wallet,  and,  depositing  an  amount  there, 
they  said, — I  wish  to  drink  that  much.  The  person  would  be  kept  there, 
through  drunkenness  and  sobriety,  sobriety  and  drunkenness,  until  the  money 
was  expended.  They  would  not  go  out  of  the  place,  because  they  would  be 
arrested.  And  it  is  oftentimes  the  case  (and  I  think  this  is  something  which 
frequently  happens)  that  a  man  will  take  a  drink,  when  he  goes  into  a  place 
where  the  sale  is  not  licensed,  and  he  will  take  not  only  one  drink,  but  he 
takes  a  second  and  third  drink,  thinking  that  he  may  not  get  another  glass  so 
easy  elsewhere.  The  consequence  is  that  the  man  may  finish  off  and  be 
drunk  on  the  spot,  whereas  he  might  have  left  a  licensed  place  without  being 
drunk.  This  I  merely  give  as  a  thought  or  opinion.  I  should  say,  also,  that 
in  my  experience  abroad — and  I  was  three  years  in  France,  in  the  midst  of 
a  wine  country,  where  wine,  I  may  almost  say,  was  as  abundant  as  water,  and 
where  I  have  even  known  masons  to  mix  their  mortar  with  it — I  never  saw  a 
man  drunk.  A  bottle  only  cost  three  pennies,  and  everybody  drank  it.  I 
have  found  that  where  wine  was  drunk  hard  liquors  are  not  much  drunk ;  it  is 
wine  exclusively.  I  also  think  (if  you  will  allow  me  to  say)  that  if  this 
country  were  a  vine-growing  country  it  would  be  a  more  temperate  country. 
These  are  facts  in  my  experience  of  which  I  speak  emphatically.  I  have 
never  seen  the  taste  for  distilled  spirits  exist  together  with  a  taste  for  wines. 
I  did  not  know  a  gallon  or  half  a  gallon  of  hard  liquors  to  be  drank  (Juring 
my  visit  in  France  during  those  three  years. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  spoke  of  your  numerous  flock.    Is  there 
much  intemperance  among  them  ? 


100  APPENDIX. 

A.  The  term  temperate  is  a  difficult  one  to  define.  The  majority  of  my 
parish  are  Canadians  or  French.  The  Worcester  Parish  is  largely  Irish, 
or  of  their  descendants. 

Q.  You  give  as  a  reason  for  opposing  the  present  law  that  when  a  man  is 
forbidden  to  do  a  thing  he  will  do  it  the  more  for  that  reason  ? 

A.    If  there  were  no  law  there  would  be  no  sin. 

Q.     Then  it  was  a  mistake  in  uttering  the  ten  commandments  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  it  was  the  violation  of  that  law  that  produced  it. 

Q.  Would  you  dispense  with  all  law  because  when  men  are  forbidden  to 
do  a  thing  therefore  they  do  it  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  but  I  would  take  care  to  be  on  the  safe  side  of  the  offence. 
I  would  not  forbid  a  man  to  do  that  which  I  knew  he  had  an  inherent  right  to 
do.  That  I  believe  to  be  the  fact  with  respect  to  the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.     You  believe  we  have  no  right  to  make  such  a  law  ? 

A.  I  believe  you  have  no  right  to  make  such  laws  with  the  intention  which 
you  have.  I  believe  that  you  have  no  right  to  tell  me  whether  or  not  I  shall 
drink  tea  or  coffee  or  wine,  or  to  tell  me  that  I  shall  oiot  sell  them. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  is  the 
final  arbiter  on  this  subject  ?  And  do  you  not  know  that  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States  and  the  Supreme  Court  of  Massachusetts  have  said 
that  we  have  a  right  to  make  such  a  law  ? 

A.  Very  good,  sir;  while  the  law  exists;  but  I  say  that  we  are  laboring 
to  change  that  law.  You  have  no  right  to  make  that  law.  In  courts  of 
legislation  a  bare  majority  makes  a  law.  That  does  not  make  it  a  right  law. 

Q.  Who  is  to  decide  what  sort  of  laws  we  have  a  right  to  make  unless  it 
is  the  courts  ? 

A.  The  courts  and  conscience.  The  simple  law  does  not  carry  always 
with  it  right.  It  carries  with  it  a  legal  right ;  but  not  a  moral  right.  I  allow 
you  that  the  legislature  may  have  a  legal  right,  but  not  a  moral  right. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Do  you  ask  for  a  license  law  ? 

A.  Before  that  series  of  questions  begins,  I  will  say  that  I  would  not  un- 
dertake to  say  just  what  kind  of  a  law  I  would  have.  If  you  will  be  satisfied 
with  a  simple  yes  in  answer  to  that  question,  I  would  say  yes. 

Q.    A  license  prohibits  a  great  majority  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  there  is  a  moral  right  to  prohibit  ninety-nine  in  a 
hundred  ? 

A.  I  do,  sir ;  therefore  I  say  you  have  a  right  to  regulate,  and  to  make  a 
proper  sale. 

Q.    Then  you  would  license  ? 

A.    I  would  license. 

Q.     And  you  would  claim  that  every  good  man  has  a  right  to  be  licensed  ? 

A.     So  far  as  the  necessities  of  the  case  require. 

Q.    But  the  inherent  right  of  sale  was  the  point  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  every  good  man  has  a  right  to  sell  it.  I  understand  the 
word  goodness  in  the  sense  that  he  sells  it  according  to  law. 

Q.  The  point  is  as  to  the  inherent  right  of  preventing  him  from  selling, 
if  you  permit  somebody  else  ?  Why  do  you  object  to  the  existing  laws  ? 


APPENDIX.  101 

A.    Because  the  existing  law  takes  away  his  right  entirely.     We  aro  all 
put  upon  the- same  ground. 

Q.  Then  your  license  law  fails  from  the  same  principle  ? 
A.  No,  sir.  There  is  in  every  community  an  inherent  right  to  sell  whis- 
koy,  wine,  alo,  rum,  gin,  beef,  butter,  or  sugar,  and  those  not  only  for  medi- 
cinal purposes,  but  for  all  purposes.  And  when  you  say  that  only  one  man 
in  fifty,  or  two  in  a  hundred  shall  sell,  you  are  governed  by  the  necessities  of 
the  case,  in  order  that  you  may  supply  a  reasonable  demand.  You  may  take 
away  the  right  from  every  forty-nine,  or  every  ninety-eight,  not  because  you 
take  away  any  right  from  them,  but  because  they  do  not  exercise  the  right  in 
a  proper  manner.  By  putting  in  the  hands  of  proper  persons,  you  hold  them 
responsible  for  every  drinking  person  in  the  place. 

Q.    While  in  France,  were  you  in  the  habit  of  being  among  the  people,  or 
were  you  in  school  or  college  ? 

A.  I  spent  all  my  vacations  (three  or  four  months  in  each  year)  among 
the  people. 

Q.  Do  you  testify  that  according  to  your  observation  no  strong  drinks 
were  used  there  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  I  did  not  see  more  than  three  or  four  persons  intoxicated.    I 
recollect  once,  at  carnival  time,  I  did  see  a  number  of  persons  in  a  cart  who 
were  shouting  pretty  loudly,  and  seemed  to  be  intoxicated ;  but  I  do  not 
know  that  they  were  really  under  the  influence  of  liquor. 
Q.    Did  your  rambles  extend  beyond  the  walls  of  Paris  ? 
A.     Olj,  yes,  sir ;  and  I  also  visited  the  south  of  France. 
Q.     Is  it  not  well  understood  that  brandy  is  extensively  used  in  France  ? 
A.    No,  sir ;  I  deny  the  assertion. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOLER.)  Did  you  never  go  outside  the  wall  of  Paris  when 
you  would  be  likely  to  see  a  pretty  free  use  of  spirits  ?  And  do  you  not  know 
that  it  is  the  habit  of  the  people  of  Paris,  to  go  outside  of  the  walls  of 
the  city  on  Sunday  and  drink  liquor  there,  because  they  can  buy  it  there 
much  cheaper  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  and,  besides  that,  I  would  never  allow  that  Paris  is  a  sample 
of  France.  I  should  take  Lyons,  or  some  other  of  the  large  cities  of  France. 
Paris  is  a  representative  of  all  nations.  Paris  is  a  cosmopolitan  city.  Paris 
may  be  called  the  hotel  of  France 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  THOMAS  SHEAHAN. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     Are  you  a  clergyman  of  the  Catholic  Church  ? 

A.    I  am. 

Q.    You  pursue  your  vocation  in  Taunton  ? 

A.     Yes. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  there  ? 

A.     Only  two  years. 

Q.     How  long  in  the  Commonwealth  ? 

A.    I  am  a  clergyman  for  the  last  seventeen  years. 

Q.  Be  kind  enough  to  state  briefly  to  the  Committee  the  result  of  your 
observation  as  to  the  working  of  the  present  liquor  law  among  the  people, 
in  reference  to  restraining  drunkenness  ? 


102  APPENDIX. 

A .  In  reply,  I  would  state  that  in  Salem,  where  I  passed  fifteen  years,  1 
endeavored,  as  far  as  lay  in  iny  power,  of  putting  down  rum-selling,  making 
use  sometimes,  of  rather  arbitrary  means,  perhaps.  I  did  it,  not  so  much 
that  I  am  a  teetotaler,  but  in  view  of  the  evils  of  intemperance  as  they 
existed.  I  was  quite  successful  until  the  passage  of  the  present  law.  I  then 
left  off  my  efforts.  I  found  that  the  prohibitory  law  increased  (jinking 
greatly,  arid  that  people  who  before  abstained,  on  account  of  the  law,  and  in 
opposition  to  the  law,  would  drink. 

Q.  Then  you  mean  to  say  that  the  attempt  of  the  law  to  prohibit  by  law 
has  weakened  the  influence  and  moral  power  of  the  clergy  over  the  people  ? 

A.  I  do,  most  decidedly.  I  found  my  efforts  were  not  so  successful  as 
before,  although  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  drinking  prevailed  to  a  gyeat 
extent  before.  But,  nevertheless,  it  was  not  as  easy  to  control  it  as  before. 

Q.     How  is  it  where  you  now  live  ? 

A.  I  am  not  so  well  acquainted  there,  and  consequently  cannot  so  well 
speak  of  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Is  the  prevalence  of  drinking  there  as  great  as  you 
have  usually  met,  in  communities  where  you  have  observed  ? 

A.  I  cannot  institute  any  comparisons.  I  shall  not  answer  any  question 
of  that  kind. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  there  ? 

A.     Two  years. 

Q.  I  ask  my  question  in  a  general  manner.  Is  drinking  greatly  prevalent 
there,  or  is  it  greatly  suppressed  there  ? 

A.     I  have  not  been  there  long  enough  to  be  prepared  to  answer. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  ROBERT  BRADY. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     You  are  a  priest  of  the  Catholic  Church  ? 

A.  I  am.  I  am  pastor  of  St.  Mary's  Church,  down  in  the  neighborhood 
of  Charlestown  Bridge,  on  Endicott  Street. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  in  that  vocation  ? 

A.     Ten  years,  next  July. 

Q.    In  this  city  ? 

A.    No,  sir.     I  have  been  in  this  city  four  years. 

Q.     Were  you  before  that  in  this  Commonwealth  ? 

A.     No,  sir;  I  was  not. 

Q.  Be  kind  enough  to  state  to  the  Committee  any  facts  and  any  opinions 
wlu'ch  you  may  have  formed  touching  the  operation  and  effects  of  the  law 
respecting  the  sale  of  liquor  and  the  habits  of  the  people  as  to  temperance  ? 

A.  The  amount  of  intemperance  I  have  seen  is  as  great  now  as  before,  I 
think.  I  have  seen  no  benefit  from  the  operation  of  the  law.  I  think  that  in 
other  respects  there  has  been  a  demoralization ;  because  instead  of  having 
liquor  in  several  places,  as  before,  th«  number  of  places  is  increased,  and  the 
condition  of  the  places  is  much  worse.  You  can  get  it  in  almost  every  place. 
They  keep  it  in  cellars,  and  in  milk  cans,  and  in  almost  every  possible  way. 
And  I  think  the  quality  of  the  liquor  is  worse. 

Q.  It  drives  the  trade  from  the  surface,  and  makes  it  a  contraband  and 
furtive  one  ? 


APPENDIX.  103 

A.     That  is  my  idea  of  it,  sir. 

Q.  Are  there  any  advantages,  which  you  have  been  able  to  observe,  from 
the  exercise  of  a  moral  and  religious  influence  over  the  people  ? 

A.  I  have  always  believed,  and  believe  now,  that  the  only  way  to  get  at 
this  temperance  reform  is  by  moral  suasion. 

Q.     Have  you  had  any  experience  in  that  ? 

A.  Yes,  I  have  known  many  persons  improved  by  moral  suasion,  and  not 
by  the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  Has  there  been  an  increase  of  the  sale  of  liquors 
within  the  limits  of  your  parish,  for  the  last  three  or  four  years  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell  positively.  My  impression  is,  that  the  number  of  places 
where  liquor  is  sold  has  increased. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  In  speaking  of  promoting  the  temperance  cause, 
precisely  what  do  you  speak  of? 

A.  Precisely  what  Mr.  Power  spoke  of.  I  understand  the  moderate  use 
of  liquors  to  be  no  sin. 

Q.  What  you  seek  among  your  people,  by  moral  suasion  or  otherwise,  is 
to  promote  their  moderate  use  ? 

A.  No.  To  promote  temperance.  There  are  some  cases  of  persons  who 
cannot  use  liquors  temperately,  and  with  those  who  cannot  use  them  temper- 
ately, I  use  moral  suasion  to  hinder  from  drinking.  I  think  I  have  no 
right,  if  they  can  use  liquors  moderately,  to  say  that  they  shall  not  use  it. 

Q.     That  is  the  general  view  of  your  clergy  ? 

A.    It  is. 

Q.    Do  you  know  any  exception  to  that  view  among  your  clergy  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  of  any. 

TESTIMONY  OF  KEV.  LAWRENCE  MCMAHON. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     Are  you  a  priest  of  the  Roman  Church  ? 

A*    I  am,  in  New  Bedford. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  lived  in  New  Bedford  ? 

A.     Since  the  first  of  January,  1865. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  a  priest  in  Massachusetts  ? 

A.     Since  I  took  orders ;  seven  years. 

Q.    Where  did  you  live  before  you  went  to  New  Bedford  ? 

A.  I  was  placed  about  two  years  in  the  household  of  Bishop  Fitzpatrick. 
I  then  went  to  the  army  and  stayed  about  twelve  months  till  I  broke  down. 
I  then  went  to  Bridgewater  and  was  there  about  fourteen  or  fifteen  months, 
and  from  there  I  went  to  New  Bedford. 

Q.  Be  kind  enough  to  state  to  the  Committee  the  result  of  your  observa- 
tion of  the  prohibitory  law  upon  the  habits  of  the  people,  in  respect  to  drunk- 
enness ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  it  checks  drunkenness,  so  far  as  my  observation  extends. 
I  do  not  believe  it  does  at  all.  I  know  that  now  in  New  Bedford — and  New 
Bedford  is  a  moral  city,  comparatively — anybody  who  wishes  to  get  liquor 
there,  can  do  it  without  any  trouble  whatsoever.  I  see  people  drunk  on  the 
street  frequently,  and  I  know  they  can  get  it. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Do  you  deem  that  a  matter  of  regret  ? 


104  APPENDIX. 

A.    I  do ;  that  they  are  drunk,  certainly. 

Q.     And  that  they  can  get  the  liquor  ? 

A.  I  do  ;  that  those  who  abuse  it  can  get  it  so  easily.  I  do  not  know  that 
it  is  that  those  who  use  it  properly  can  get  it. 

Q.    Have  you  any  plan  to  prevent  it  ? 

A.  Yes.  We  have  two  temperance  societies  there ;  and  I  believe  they 
have  done  more  to  promote  temperance  than  all  the  constables  in  Bristol 
County. 

Q.    What  is  the  character  of  the  pledge  ? 

A.  If  a  man  comes  to  me,  I  give  him  the  pledge,  if  he  is  in  danger  from 
drinking. 

Q.    Is  your  society  based  on  the  doctrine  of  total  abstinence  ? 

A.  Yes  ;  and  they  are  expelled  if  they  break  over.  Jt  is  emphatically  a 
total  abstinence  society. 

Q.  Those  people  who  can  be  trusted  to,  drink  moderately,  do  not  join  your 
society  ? 

A.  There  are  some  men  who,  I  think,  cannot  drink  moderately,  and  whom 
I  recommend  to  be  total  abstinence  men.  They  are  not  all  topers. 

Q.     Do  the  leading  men  of  your  communion  join  the  temperance  societies  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  how  they  stand,  and  if  I  did  I  should  not  wish  to  tell. 

Q.     Are  you  a  member  of  that  society  ? 

A.    I  am  not. 

Q.  Do  you  propose  by  a  license  law  to  put  the  attainment  of  liquor  beyond 
the  reach  of  any  portion  of  the  community  ? 

A.  I  believe  in  a  license  law  in  general ;  but  the  matters  of  detail  I  have 
,not  arranged. 

Q.  Do  you  see  any  principles  in  the  prohibition  of  the  sale  of  liquors,  from 
which  so  much  evil  comes,  different  from  the  prohibition  of  other  vices  ? 

A.  I  do.  There  is  a  difference  in  regard  to  theft,  lying,  and  blasphemy. 
There  is  no  moderation  in  theft.  But  to  take  one  glass  of  wine,  I  never  knew 
to  be  a  crime  ;  nor  has  it  been  so  considered  by  Mohamedan,  Greek  or  Jew, 
from  Plato  down  to  the  present  time. 

Q.  Do  you  recognize  it  to  be  a  duty  obligatory  upon  a  Christian  to  forego 
for  himself  any  personal  good,  when  by  so  doing  he  can  greatly  promote  th.e 
public  good  ? 

A.  I  understand  what  you  are  driving  at.  In  the  first  place,  I  would  not 
admit  that  this  promotes  the  public  good.  I  do  not  think  a  man  is  bound,  as 
you  put  it,  not  to  do  so. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  paying  of  money  from  your  pocket  to  repair  the 
ravages  of  drunkenness  and  crime,  is  a  foregoing  of  personal  good  for  a  public 
good  ? 

A.     That  is  a  question  of  taxation  and  political  economy. 

Q..    Do  you  protest  against  the  right  ? 

A.     No.     I  always  pay  what  I  am  called  upon  to  pay. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  of  the  right  of  the  State  to  support  the  poor  by  a 
tax  on  the  personal  earnings  of  others  ? 

A.  It  seems  to  me  these  questions  are  intended  to  be  captious  rather  than 
to  draw  out  the  truth. 


APPENDIX.  105 

Q.  I  am  exceedingly  unfortunate  in  the  objections  to  my  questions.  Is 
the  right  to  sell  or  to  drink  any  stronger  than  the  right  to  hold  one's  earn- 
ings ?  And  when  the  government  takes  the  earnings  of  a  man  to  repair  the 
ravages  of  intemperance,  does  it  not  infringe  one's  private  rights  as  directly 
as  when  it  prohibits  the  right  of  a  man  to  sell  liquor  ? 

A.  When  the  liquor  law  abolishes  all  laws  to  support  paupers,  and  it  is 
found  better  than  a  license  law,  I  will  answer  the  question.  But  I  don't 
think  there  will  be  any  more  paupers  to  support  under  a  license  law  than 
under  the  present  law. 

TESTIMONY  OF  KEV.  MANASSAS  DOHEKTY. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     Are  you  a  priest  of  the  Catholic  Church  ? 

A.    I  am, — in  Cambridge. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  a  resident  of  Massachusetts  and  in  the 
performance  of  clerical  duties  ? 

A.     Since  May,  1844. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  lived  in  Cambridge  ? 

A.     All  that  time,  in  Cambridge  or  East  Cambridge. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  your  views,  assuming  I  have  put  the 
same  questions  to  you  that  I  did  to  the  gentleman  who  last  preceded  you  ? 

A.  As  you  have  summed  up  the  question,  I  will  also  sum  up  my  answer; 
and  I  will  give  the  answers  of  the  reverend  gentlemen  who  have  pre- 
ceded me,  particularly  those  of  Rev.  Mr.  Power,  of  Worcester. 

Q.     You  concur  with  what  he  said  ? 

A.     I  do. 

Q.     What  has  been  the  result  of  your  own  observation  ? 

A.  I  do  not  really  think  that  the  amount  of  drinking  among  the  class  of 
people  to  whom  I  minister  has  been  either  increased  or  diminished  by  legisla- 
tion. The  first  year  that  I  came  to  America,  in  1837,  I  do  believe  there  was 
as  much  intemperance  among  the  class  of  people  to  whom  I  minister  as  there 
is  now,  keeping  in  view  the  amount  of  population.  I  believe  that  at  certain 
times,  however,  intemperance  may  have  increased,  owing  to  particular  causes, 
from  excitement.  For  instance,  at  the  time  of  recruiting,  I  found  there  was 
a  great  deal  of  intemperance,  more  than  at  any  other  period  that  I  remember 
since  I  entered  the  ministry  of  my  church.  I  have  nothing  to  say  with  regard 
to  the  law.  I  believe  its  results  are  not  going  to  be  productive  of  the  benefits 
which  the  framers  of  the  law  intended. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  agree  with  Rev.  Mr.  Power  in  relation  to 
the  position  of  your  clergy  on  the  question  of  moderate  drinking  as  the  true 
temperance  doctrine  ? 

A.  I  do.  By  way  of  explanation,  I  should  also  remark  that  I  do  not  take 
any  spirituous  liquors  myself.  Not  because  I  think  a  moderate  use  of  it  is  an 
evil,  but  I  do  not  take  it  for  a  sanitary  reason.  But  I  agree  with  Rev.  Mr. 
Power  and  the  other  gentlemen  of  my  denomination  who  have  preceded  me. 

Adjourned. 

H 


106  APPENDIX. 


FIFTH    DAY. 

WEDNESDAY,  Feb.  27,  1867. 
The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  and  the  hearing  of  evidence  was  resumed. 

TESTIMONY  or  REV.  JOHN  P.  ROBINSON. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Will  you  be  kind  enough  tf>  state  your  residence 
and  duties  ? 

A.  My  residence,  sir,  is  in  the  city  of  Boston,  No.  67  Bedford  Street.  My 
church  is  the  free  church  of  Saint  Mary's  for  sailors,  on  Richmond  Street. 

Q.  How  extensive  is  your  connection  with  the  people,  especially  of  the 
lower  and  poorer  classes  of  the  people  in  that  part  of  the  city  ? 

A.  My  connection  with  the  people  is  throughout  the  city,  but  my  particu- 
lar labors  would  be  confined  chiefly  to  the  North  End. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  so  employed  ? 

A.     I  have  entered  upon  my  twenty-third  year  of  work  in  this  position. 

Q.  How  extensively  do  your  duties  and  position  bring  you  in  contact  with 
the  people,  so  as  to  furnish  observation  as  to  the  state  of  the  poorer  classes  ? 

A.  1  think,  sir,  as  generally  as  almost  any  other  clergyman  in  the  city  of 
Boston.  I  occupy,  sir,  relatively,  now  (having  from  necessity  been  so  long 
in  the  same  position,)  the  same  position  at  the  North  End,  that  my  excellent 
brother,  Mr.  Wells,  does  at  the  South  End. 

Q.  What  has  your  observation  been  for  the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years  in 
regard  to  the  progress  of  intemperance  ? 

A.  I  think  I  can  say,  without  any  hesitation,  that  there  has  been  an 
increase,  a  very  considerable  increase  in  that  time ;  probably  from  the  increase 
of  foreign  population  among  us,  and  from  their  congregating  more  generally 
to  that  part  of  the  city. 

Q.  Have  you  observed  in  regard  to  intemperance,  how  general  it  is  with 
regard  to  the  different  members  of  the  same  family  ? 

A.  I  am  sorry  to  say  that  I  find  it  now  more  noticeable  among  the  differ- 
ent members  of  the  family,  not  only  with  the  father  and  mother,  but  fre- 
quently with  the  children.  It  is  not  an  uncommon  thing  to  find  girls  and 
boys  from  twelve  to  fourteen  years  of  age,  under  the  influence  of  liquor. 
Very  often  among  those  who  come  to  see  me  I  observe  it  from  their  breath  ; 
and  they  may  tell  me  that  they  have  taken  it,  probably  for  some  cold  or  pain. 

Q.    Is  that  feature  more  modern  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is,  sir.  I  think  a  few  years  ago  the  intemperance  was  con- 
fined to  the  father  and  mother,  or  adults.  It  was  comparatively  rare  fifteen 
years  ago  to  find  a  drunken  child  at  the  North  End.  Even  children  of  the 
foreign  population  were  comparatively  free  from  that  vice. 

Q.  Has  there  been  any  change  in  the  mode  of  getting  liquor,  or  in  places 
of  keeping  it,  which  tends  to  produce  this  result  ? 


APPENDIX.  107 

A.  There  has  been  a  very  decided  change  within  the  last  two  or  three 
years,  and  probably  within  the  last  five  years. 

Q.     What  is  it,  sir  ? 

A.  The  liquor  is  now  found  in  a  great  many  of  the  cellars  and  basement 
rooms  and  the  attics,  at  the  North  End.  There  are  very  few  places  where  a 
person  who  wants  it,  cannot  find  it.  You  will  not  see  it  when  you  go  in,  but 
you  will  smell  it,  and  if  you  want  it  you  can  find  it. 

Q.    In  your  opinion,  has  there  been  considerable  increase  ? 

A.  I  have  no  question,  sir,  that  it  has  increased  five  per  cent.,  as  regards 
the  habit  of  drinking  among  women  and  men  and  children  at  the  North  End. 
We  have  known  instances  where  children  have  received  a  glass  of  liquor  for 
going  for  liquor  for  others,  being  compensated,  not  by  a  penny,  but  from  the 
liquor  itself. 

Q.  What  should  you  say  as  to  the  increase  or  diminution  of  the  sale  oi 
liquor  in  this  way  ? 

A.  I  think  it  has  been  quite  in  proportion  to  the  closing  of  the  other 
places ;  and  I  think  there  are  quite  as  many  facilities  for  obtaining  liquor 
now,  as  there  were  when  there  were  licenses  for  the  public  sale. 

Q.  Then,  if  the  public  places  were  closed,  would  it,  in  your  opinion,  have 
any  effect  in  diminishing  the  number  of  places,  or  would  it  increase  the 
number  of  places  where  these  people  can  get  liquor  ? 

A.  If  the  public  sale  is  closed,  I  think  it  would  stop  drinking  among  stran- 
gers, but  I  do  not  think  it  would  have  any  effect  at  all  upon  those  who  are 
residents  of  the  city,  and  are  in  the  habit  of  drinking,  and  are  in  the  habit  of 
getting  it  as  they  want  it.  There  are  certain  ways  that  men  can  get  it,  and 
their  friends  soon  find  out  where  they  can  buy  it. 

Q.  I  would  inquire  if  you  have  formed  any  opinion  of  the  effect  of  the 
existing  prohibitory  law,  in  regard  to  the  progress  of  intemperance  ? 
•  A.  I  have  not,  sir,  beyond  the  facts  that  I  have  stated.  I,  myself,  sir,  if 
there  could  be  a  prohibitory  law  in  effect,  should  be  very  glad  to  see  it.  I 
was  very  earnest  myself  in  the  beginning  of  this  movement,  and  was  ready  to 
do  anything  that  would  banish  this  evil ;  but  I  am  satisfied  that  it  never  can 
be  accomplished  by  a  prohibitory  law.  I  may  be  mistaken,  but  I  have  given  a 
great  deal  of  thought  to  the  subject,  and  have  had  a  good  deal  of  observation 
in  reference  to  it ;  and  I  have  held  such  a  position  that  the  subject  has  always 
been  before  me. 

Q.  Have  you  formed  any  impression  or  any  opinion  from  your  peculiar 
field  of  observation,  as  to  any  other  system  of  legislation  that  might  be  more 
productive  in  aiding  the  friends  of  temperance  in  promoting  their  objects  V 

A.  I  have,  sir ;  I  have  often  referred  with  a  great  deal  of  satisfaction  to 
the  time  when  we  had  a  license  law  in  the  State.  We  felt  the  force  of  that 
law  at  the  North  End.  We  saw  its  good  effect  during  the  week  days,  and  we 
derived  a  great  comfort  from  its  enforcement  on  Sunday, 

Q.  How  is  the  prohibitory  law  enforced  on  Sunday  in  these  furtive  places  ? 
Is  it  enforced  there  any  at  all  ? 

A.    I  do  not  suppose  that  it  would  be  possible  to  reach  these  places. 

Q.  Have  these  places  seemed  to  increase  more  rapidly  within  the  last  four 
or  five  months  ? 


108  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  cannot  say  within  the  last  four  or  five  months ;  but  within  the  last 
few  years  there  has  been  a  gradual  increase  all  the  time.  We  might  find 
cases  where  we  do  not  expect  it. 

Q,  Suppose  that  a  law  should  be  enacted  giving  to  the  mayor  and  alder- 
men the  power  of  licensing  or  not,  and  placing  the  responsibility  in  their 
hands,  making  licensed  places  responsible  to  the  mayor  and  aldermen,  and 
leaving  the  Maine  Law  in  full  force;  what  would  be  the  effect  of  such  an 
instrumentality  fully  administered  ? 

A.  I  think  it  would  have  a  very  beneficial  influence.  It  would  reach 
places  that  are  not  reached  now,  and  which  could  not  be  reached  by  the 
present  law. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  difficulty  strangers  may  have  now  in  getting  liquor. 
If  you  had  a  license  law  would  you  or  not  exclude  the  public  bar  ? 

A.  I  certainly  should,  sir.  By  public  bars,  I  mean  all  places  such  as 
saloons  where  liquor  is  sold. 

Q.     The  denomination  with  which  you  are  connected  is  what,  sir  ? 

A.     The  Episcopal  Church. 

Q.  How  is  the  fact  as  to  the  members  of  the  clergy  and  the  influential 
members  of  the  church,  in  regard  to  withholding  active  co-operation  with  the 
temperance  men  now,  compared  with  what  it  was  under  the  other  system  ? 

A.  I  am  hardly  prepared  to  answer  that  question.  I  only  know  of  my 
own  personal  feeling  and  action.  I  believe  that  all  the  clergy  are  in  favor  of 
the  temperance  movement.  Some  are  not  in  favor  of  the  present  law.  My 
feelings  have  been  strongly  in  its  favor,  until  I  found  we  could  not  reach  the 
point  that  we  aimed  at. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)  You  say  that  you  have  often  had  occasion  to 
refer  with  pleasure  to  the  time  when  the  license  law  was  in  full  operation ; 
what  year  was  this  ? 

A .  Well,  I  do  not  know,  sir,  that  I  can  tell  you  what  year ;  it  was  during 
the  administration  of  Mayor  Quincy. 

Q.    Which  Mr.  Quincy  ? 

A.     Josiah  Quincy,  Jr. 

Q.     What  did  he  do  under  that  law  ? 

A.  As  to  that,  I  only  judge  from  the  operation  of  the  law  at  that  time, 
particularly  as  to  the  closing  of  the  shops  on  Sunday.  We  had  but  little 
sale  there,  except  occasionally,  although  it  has  always  been  sold ;  if  not  in 
public  places,  yet  it  was  sold  in  private  places. 

Q.     Who  were  licensed  at  that  time  ? 

A.     Well,  I  do  not  know  that  I  can  answer  that  question,  even. 

Q.     Do  you  know  that  anybody  was  licensed  ? 

A.     Well,  I  do  not  think  that  I  could  refer  to  any  fact  of  the  case. 

Q.  Supposing  that  I  should  tell  you  that  Mr.  Quincy  never  gave  a 
license  ? 

A.     Then,  sir,  I  should  admit  that  I  was  mistaken  in  what  I  supposed. 

Q.  You  say  that  your  clergy  are  strongly  in  favor  of  the  cause  of  tem- 
perance ? 

A.     So  far  as  I  know,  sir,  they  are.    I  do  not  know  to  the  contrary. 


APPENDIX.  109 

Q.  What  are  their  views  as  regards  temperance  ;  as  to  the  total  abstinence 
from  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  beverage,  and  as  to  the  use  of  them 
in  moderation  ? 

A.  Well,  I  suppose  that  question  I  could  not  answer  fully.  Many  of 
them  I  know  are  in  favor  of  entire  total  abstinence.  Probably  a  very  fair 
proportion  of  the  Episcopal  clergy  are  in  favor  of  it. 

Q.     How  is  it  as  regards  the  Episcopal  clergy  of  Boston  ? 

A.  That  is  a  question  I  could  not  answer.  I  am  not  much  acquainted 
with  the  clergy  of  Boston.  I  am  chiefly  confined  to  my  work  at  the  North 
End,  and  it  is  very  much  a  personal  work  with  me,  and  it  does  not  involve  so 
much  attention  among  the  other  clergymen  of  my  church. 

Q.     Do  you  preach  the  doctrine  of  total  abstinence  ? 

A.  Always,  sir.  We  have  two,  and  I  may  say  three,  temperance  societies 
— one  for  boys,  and  one  for  men,  and  one  for  females.  We  preach  the  total 
abstinence  principle  among  our  poor  people,  and  I  have  always  inculcated 
that  doctrine. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Do  you  use  a  pledge  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  we  have  a  peculiar  pledge  among  the  "cold  water  boys." 
They  have  a  peculiar  organization,  and  they  meet  once  a  week  in  the  base- 
ment of  our  church.  In  the  female  society,  I  presume  they  have  the  same 
pledge,  as  most  of  the  teachers  are  engaged  in  both  societies.  I  do  not  have 
so  much  to  do  with  the  latter  society. 

Q.     What  is  this  pledge  that  you  speak  of? 

A.     It  is  a  total  abstinence  pledge. 

Q.     Is  your  name  enrolled  with  them  ? 

A.    Not  with  them;  but  it  is  with  the  early  portions  of  that  movement. 

Q.  Do  you  regard  yourself  as  pledged  against  the  use  of  intoxicating 
liquors  ? 

A.'  Well,  I  am  not  and  never  have  been  a  drinking  man  at  any  period  of 
my  life.  1  have  no  fondness  for  making  liquor  an  occasional  drink.  If  I 
found  that  I  had  occasion  for  it,  I  should  take  it  as  I  should  take  anything 
else. 

Q.  You  do  not  regard  yourself,  then,  as  a  clergyman,  pledged  to  total 
abstinence  ? 

A.     I  do  not  regard  myself,  as  a  clergyman,  pledged  to  abstain  totally. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     What  kind  of  a  license  law  are  you  in  favor  of? 

A.     I  am  in  favor  of  any  law  that  will  break  up  the  usage  of  drinking. 

Q.  You  would  favor  the  law  as  it  was  under  the  administration  of  Mr. 
Quincy  ? 

A.  So  far  as  my  recollection  extends  at  that  time,  I  think  we  had  less  of 
it  then  than  we  had  at  any  time  since. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  increase  of  the  traffic,  and  say  that  it  has  been  fully 
five  per  cent.  ? 

A.     Well,  sir,  I  would  say  it  was  fully  as  much. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)    How  are  you  able  to  make  so  fine  a  calculation  ? 
A.     Well,  sir,  I  am  speaking  within  bounds. 

Q.     You  speak  of  your  brethren  being  laborers  in  the  temperance  move- 
ment ;  do  you  use  the  phrase  "  temperance  movement  "  advisedly  ? 


110  APPENDIX. 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  I  understand  your  question. 

Q.  Speaking  in  general  of  the  temperance  reform ;  we  take  it  when  speak- 
ing of  temperance,  that  total  abstinence  is  meant.  Do  you  take  it  that 
the  clergymen  generally  are  in  favor  of  the  total  abstinence  movement? 

A.  No,  sir ;  it  is  not  my  impression  that  the  clergy  in  general  are  in  favor 
of  that  movement. 

Q.     Are  your  clergymen,  generally  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know,  sir ;  I  do  not  think  that,  as  a  body,  they  are. 

Q.     Do  you  know  of  men  among  your  clergy  that  are  total  abstinence  men  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir,  I  do. 

Q.  Are  you  in  the  habit  of  meeting  those  among  your  clergymen  who  do 
not  occasional  take  wine  ? 

A.     That  is  a  question  that  I  am  not  able  to  answer. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  increase  of  the  population  at  the  North  End  ;  is  it  not 
the  same  true  of  Mr.  Wells'  vicinity  ? 

A.    I  should  suppose  it  was. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  American  families  of  any  considerable  standing 
in  the  neighborhood  of  Saint  Stephen's  House  ?  Is  not  the  population  entirely 
foreign  ? 

A.     No,  sir  ;  I  do  not  think  it  is. 

Q.     Is  any  admixture  that  remains  of  the  poorer  class  of  Americans  ? 

A .  I  think  there  are  still  respectable  families  of  Americans  in  that  neigh- 
borhood. 

Q.     Are  you  familiar  with  that  locality  ? 

A .     So  familiar  that  I  am  passing  through  there  frequently. 

Q.  You  have  no  doubt  that  the  general  remark  as  to  the  North  End, 
applies  equally  to  that  neighborhood  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  it  is  to  the  same  extent. 

Q.  You  speak  of  putting  the  administration  of  the  liquor  interest  into 
the  hands  of  the  mayor  and  aldermen  of  the  city  of  Boston.  What 
action  of  the  mayor  and  aldermen  for  the  last  twenty  years,  encourages  you 
to  repose  confidence  in  that  body  of  men,  for  the  restriction  of  the  liquor 
traffic  ? 

A.  Only  that,  sir,  which  we  might  hope  to  result  from  a  stringent  license 
system. 

Q.  You  have  not  any  special  confidence  in  that  body,  but  would  only 
expect  good  measures  from  common  men  in  such  a  place  ? 

A.     Certainly,  sir. 

Q.  You  speak  of  a  stringent  license  system.  How  would  you  adjust  a 
license  law,  that  would  prevent  the  selling  of  liquor  in  all  parts  of  the  city? 

A.  I  do  not  profess  to  be  wise  enough  to  provide  such  a  law  as  would  be 
required. 

Q.  Is  it  not  clear  that  if  you  license  such  a  number  of  people  in  the  neigh- 
borhood, there  would  be  no  restraint  in  the  use  of  liquor  in  these  places  ? 

A .    I  do  not  think  that  would  be  the  effect  of  the  law. 

Q.  What  reason  have  you  to  think  that  the  mayor  and  aldermen  would 
not  license  in  every  part  of  the  city  when  they  have  refused  for  fifteen  years 
persistently  to  apply  the  existing  law  to  the  breaking  down  of  the  traffic  ? 


APPENDIX.  Ill 

A.  I  think  I  should  have  sufficient  confidence  in  the  manner  in  which  a 
law  of  that  kind  would  be  carried  out.  I  have  no  doubt  that  if  we  have  a 
license  law  it  will  be  so  carefully  guarded  that  there-  will  not  be  much  left 
for  the  mayor  and  aldermen  to  do. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  WILLIAM  R.  ALGER. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Where  do  you  reside,  and  what  are  your  peculiar 
duties  ? 

A.  My  residence  is  38  Temple  Street,  in  the  city  of  Boston.  I  am  pastor 
of  the  society  whose  legal  title  is  "  The  New  North  Religious  Society  of  the 
town  of  Boston." 

Q.  I  would  like  to  inquire  of  you,  sir,  so  far  as  you  have  been  able  from 
your  observation  and  peculiar  duties  to  form  an  opinion,  any  opinion  which 
you  may  have  as  to  the  effect  of  the  present  prohibitory  laws,  as  regards 
extensive  drinking  in  the  community  ? 

A.  My  opinion  is,  from  the  observation  that  has  been  within  my  reach, 
that  the  law  is  null  and  void  ;  that  it  has  no  effect  at  all  in  the  city  of  Boston. 

Q.  What  is  your  observation  as  to  the  increase  of  intemperance  in  the  city 
of  Boston  during  the  past  ten  or  fifteen  years  ? 

A.  I  have  very  few  data  for  forming  opinions,  but  I  have  a  strong  impres- 
sion that  intemperance  has  increased  very  much  within  the  last  six  years. 
As  to  the  last  fifteen  years,  I  know  not.  Within  the  last  six  years,  I  think 
intemperance  has  very  much  increased,  though  I  think  it  has  been  very  much 
the  result  of  causes  foreign  to  any  legislation  of  any  kind. 

Q.  What  opinion,  if  any,  have  you  formed  as  regards  any  system  of  legis- 
lation upon  this  subject  different  from  that  at  present  ? 

A.  My  opinion,  sir,  is  very  clear  that  a  judicious  and  stringent  license 
law  would  be  far  preferable  in  its  operation,  and  far  more  in  its  theoretical 
consistency  with  our  institutions. 

Q.  What  is  there  in  this  system  that  induces  thinking  men  to  abstain 
from  co-operating  with  it  ? 

A.  I  think,  sir,  that  an  act  of  legislation  interfering  with  the  private 
habits  of  individuals  is  contrary  to  the  spirit  and  genius  of  American  institu- 
tions ;  that  in  a  democratic  government  the  people  should  be  left  entirely  free 
in  everything  that  does  not  concern  directly  the  laws  that  are  instituted  for 
the  protection  of  property  and  life.  And  I  think  that  every  man  who  is  not 
prejudiced  by  bias,  who  thinks  carefully  upon  the  history  of  legislation,  will 
desire  to  see  it  limited  to  the  utmost,  and  that  it  shall  interfere  as  little  as 
possible  in  every  respect  with  the  rights  of  the  citizen,  leaving  everything  that 
possibly  can  be  left  entirely  to  the  people,  especially  in  a  democracy  like  our 
own.  That  is  the  ground  on  which  my  preference  is  expressed  for  a  license 
system.  If  it  is  not  improper,  I  should  be  glad  to  add  that  my  feelings  in 
regard  to  the  subject  of  intemperance  are  well  known.  I  am  and  always 
have  been  against  it.  I  have  had  occasion  to  see  something  of  the  evils  of 
intemperance ;  but  there  are  a  thousand  others  existing  against  which  no  one 
would  invoke  legislation,  and  it  seems  to  me  that  consistency  does  not  require 
it  here. 


112  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Was  there  a  time  -when  clergymen  and  others  were  more  engaged  in 
the  temperance  reform  than  they  are  now  ? 

A.  I  can  hardly  express  an  opinion  on  that  subject;  however,  I  should 
think  that  the  clergymen  are  as  much  interested  now  as  ever. 

Q.  Are  the  clergymen  and  others  that  formerly  co-operated  in  other  tem- 
perance movements,  inclined  to  take  an  active  part  in  co-operating  with  this 
particular  movement,  with  particular  reference  to,  the  enforcement  of  the 
present  law  ? 

A.  I  should  think  that  a  great  many  are;  and  a  considerable  portion  are 
not. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  speak  generally,  or  with  reference  to  your 
own  brethren  ? 

A.    I  speak  generally,  so  far  as  my  observation  reaches. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  the  Methodist  denomination  are  in  favor  of 
the  present  law  ? 

A.     I  think  they  are  unanimous  in  favor  of  the  present  system. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  Congregationalist  clergymen  out  of  the  city  of 
Boston  who  are  not  in  favor  of  this  system  ? 

A .    I  cannot  say  as  to  that,  sir. 

Q.  How  is  it  as  to  the  Congregationalist  clergymen  in  this  city  ?  Is  not 
Mr.  Hale  in  favor  of  it  ?  . 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  I  think  so. 

Q.     Docs  not  Mr.  Gannett  favor  it  ? 

A.     I  think  he  does. 

Q.     Does  not  Mr.  Hepworth  favor  it  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  I  have  a  very  distinct  opinion  that  there  are  very 
many  clergymen  who  would  not  labor  for  a  prohibitory  law,  who  would  labor 
earnestly  for  temperance  aside  from  legislation. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  By  temperance  you  do  not  mean  moderate 
drinking  ? 

A.  Sometimes  the  term  may  be  used  with  different  significations.  There 
is  a  technical  use  of  the  word  which  restricts  to  entire  abstinence.  The  word 
has  fairly  two  meanings. 

Q.     In  which  sense  do  you  use  the  term  ? 

A.    I  should  use  it  in  the  sense  of  a  moderate  use  of  liquor. 

Q.  Then  you  mean  that  those  clergymen  who  favor  the  temperance  move- 
ment labor  in  favor  of  a  moderate  use  ? 

A.  I  do  not  mean  that.  When  I  speak  of  the  effort  of  the  clergymen,  as 
regards  temperance,  I  mean  that  they  labor  for  temperance  in  the  strict  sense 
of  the  word.  When  you  ask  me  if  there  are  many  clergymen  who  will 
refrain  from  active  co-operation  with  the  temperance  movement  on  account 
of  the  prohibitory  law,  I  mean  then,  in  the  sense  of  a  moderate  use  of 
liquors. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  increase  of  intemperance  within  the  last  six  years. 
Does  that  cover  your  experience  in  Boston  ? 

A.    I  have  been  here  twelve  years. 

Q.    Do  you  speak  of  your  own  acquaintance,  or  generally  of  the  city  ? 

A.    Generally  of  the  city. 


APPENDIX.  113 

Q.    Is  it  true  of  your  own  parish  ? 

A.    I  think  it  is  not  in  my  own  parish. 

Q.    How  do  you  judge  that  it  is  true  of  the  city  at  large  ? 

A.    I  judge  that  the  number  of  places  in  which  liquor  is  sold  has  increased. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  how  the  number  compares  with  the  number  of  places 
before  ? 

A.    I  cannot  say  as  to  that. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  what  the  assessors'  returns  and  the  State  Constable's 
returns  are  ? 

A.    I  am  not. . 

Q.    How  are  you  able  to  gainsay  the  reports  of  these  men  ? 

A.  I  do  not  mean  to  affirm  the  fact  to  be  either  way,  but  to  give  my 
own  opinion  to  you ;  and  I  am  willing  to  admit  that  my  data  are  not  very 
extensive. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  ever  think  that  the  existence  of  a  war 
for  four  years  had  an  unfavorable  effect  upon  the  cause  of  temperance  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  influence  of  the  war  was  very  strong,  and  that  it  had 
an  immense  influence  as  regards  the  evils  of  intemperance. 

Q.     Should  you  not  think  that  was  the  principal  cause  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  I  should  think  tt  was. 

Q.  Have  you  not  noticed  that  respect  for  law  generally  has  increased  since 
the  close  of  the  war  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  I  think  it  has. 

Q.  Would  you  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  we  should  have  no  law  upon  the 
subject  ? 

A-  It  may  be  necessary  to  regulate  without  suspending  the  sale.  One 
reason  why  I  think  that  a  license  system  would  be  better  than  a  promiscuous 
sale  is  this :  it  seems  to  me  that  a  license  law,  administered  by  intelligent 
and  high-minded  men,  would  limit  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors  to  a  much 
more  respectable  cla^s  of  persons,  and  that  one  consequence  would  be  an 
improvement  in  the  quality  of  the  liquors.  And  I  think  that  very  much  of  the 
evil,  arising  from  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors,  is  produced  by  these  poisons. 
One  great  improvement,  £  think,  would  be  the  giving  of  a  very  limited  num- 
ber of  licenses,  and  then  securing  some  respectable  and  high-minded  persons 
who  will  not  adulterate  and  poison  their  liquors ;  and,  also,  I  would  have  them 
discriminate  between  the  persons  to  whom  they  would  sell. 

Q.  Does  your  memory  run  back  to  the  time  when  the  license  law  was  in 
effect  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  You  do  not  remember  the  fact  that  a  large  number  of  persons  sold  at 
that  time  without  a  license  ? 

A.    I  am  not  acquainted  with  the  fact. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  GEORGE  W.  BLAGDEN,  D.  D. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  CHILD.)    You  are  one  of  the  officiating  clergymen  at  the 
Old  South  Church? 
A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    How  long  have  you  resided  in  Boston  ? 
15 


114  APPENDIX. 

A.     About  thirty -six  years,  sir ;  not  as  pastor  of  that  church  all  the  while. 

Q.  I  would  inquire,  if  from  your  sphere  of  observation  you  have  been  able 
to  form  a  conclusion  as  to  the  progress  of  intemperance  during  the  last  ten  or 
fifteen  years,  in  this  city? 

A.  I  am  not  very  familiarly  acquainted  with  specific  measures;  but  my 
general  impression,  from  the  papers,  and  from  what  I  have  observed  aside  from 
reading,  is  that  intemperance  has  increased  within  the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years. 

Q.  Have  you  been  able  to  form  opinions  from  your  observation,  and  from 
your  investigations,  as  to  the  comparative  evil  resulting  from  intemperance 
under  the  license  system,  and  under  the  prohibitory  system  ?. 

A.  I  have  never  liked  the  prohibitory  system,  because  I  think  it  takes 
away,  in  a  degree,  the  condition  of  temperance.  I  am  in  the  habit  of  saying 
that  temperance  is  self-control  in  the  use  of  everything ;  but  I  do  not  think 
that  there  can  be  temperance  where  a  person  has  to  use  a  certain  thing  spec- 
ified. I  cannot  conceive  of  temperance  where  I  have  not  the  power  to  use. 

Q.     What  system  do  you  think  would  be  most  preferable  in  Boston  ? 

A.  I  have  been  in  the  habit  of  thinking  that  a  license  system  was  a  better 
system.  It  puts  the  power  of  sale  in  the  hands  of  gentlemen  approved  by 
the  existing  government  of  the  city  or  the  State,  as  the  case  might  be ;  and  I 
think  it  would  be  much  better  to  do  that  thaiilt  would  to  have  a  prohibitory 
law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  the  grounds  upon 
which  you  prefer  a  license  law  to  a  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  think  that  it  leaves  the  question  of  temperance  more  free  to  be  exer- 
cised. I  do  not  believe  a  man  can  be  temperate  where  you  prohibit  the  object 
in  reference  to  which  he  is  temperate.  There  is  no  temperance  where  you 
cannot  use.  If  I  have  not  a  right  to  use,  that  is  total  abstinence ;  but  there 
is  no  temperance. 

Q.     Do  you  mean  to  say  there  is  no  temperance  without  use  ? 

A.     There  is  no  actual  temperance  without  use. 

Q.  Do  you  feel  that  you  cannot  apply  the  term  of  temperance  to  those  of 
your  brethren,  or  to  those  of  the  clergymen  generally,  who  on  principle 
constantly  abstain  from  liquors  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  Why,  no,  sir;  they  are  temperate  men,  and  I  have  never  had  a  doubt 
that  they  were ;  but  the  principle  on  which  they  are  temperate,  I  might  differ 
from  them  in  stating.  They  should  not  be  ministers  if  they  are  not  temperate ; 
and  I  should  feel  bound  to  institute  proceedings  against  them  if  they  were 
not. 

Q.     Would  you  say  that  there  is  temperance  without  use  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     How  do  you  account  for  that  ? 

A.     Because  I  must  show  I  had  the  object  in  which  I  am  temperate. 

Q.  Then  you  prefer  a  license  law  to  a  prohibitory  law  because  it  favors 
the  use  of  liquor  moderately  ? 

A.  Because  it  favors  the  regulation  of  that  which  a  man  needs  more  or 
less  for  different  purposes. 

Q.     Including  use. 

A .     Including  use,  if  he  feel  it  his  duty  to  use  it. 


APPENDIX.  115 

Q.    Use  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  I  did  not  say  beverage.  I  suppose  that  sometimes  a  person  might  want 
to  use  that  which  was  intoxicating,  although  he  did  not  use  it  as  a  beverage. 

Q.    Do  these  various  uses  include  his  use  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  have  never  thought  that  intoxicating  liquor  was  good  as  a 
beverage ;  I  have  never  supposed  that  use  was  temperance. 

Q.  Well,  sir,  allow  me  to  ask,  if  the  license  system,  in  your  judgment, 
would  tend  more  to  the  restriction  of  its  use  as  a  beverage  than  the  prohibi- 
tory law  ?. 

A.  I  think  so,  from  all  that  I  read  in  the  newspapers  and  hear.  As  I 
have  already  said,  I  have  not  many  specific  facts ;  but  I  take  the  facts  and 
impressions  that  I  receive  from  the  papers,  and  from  those  that  I  come  in 
contact  with. 

Q.    Does  your  information  come  from  religious  or  secular  papers  ? 

A.    I  read  both,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  name  a  religious  paper  in  New  England  that  objects  to  the 
prohibitory  law  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  of  any  that  do. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  secular  paper  in  Boston  that  does  favor  the 
prohibitory  law  ? 

A .    I  do  not  know  as  to  that. 

Q.  Speaking  of  the  great  body  of  your  own  clergymen  in  the  city  and 
throughout  New  England,  what  is  your  impression  ? 

A .  I  have  an  impression  that  most  of  the  clergy  of  my  own  denomination 
would  go  for  the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.    Are  there  any  in  Boston  who  would  not  ? 

A.    J  do  not  know  of  any. 

Q.  Are  you  sure  that  there  is  any  clergyman  of  your  own  sect  opposed  to 
it  out  and  out  ? 

A.  I  have  not  conversed  with  them  on  the  subject ;  I  have  an  impression 
that  there  is  at  least  one. 

Q.    How  many  are  there  of  your  clergy  in  the  city  ? 

A.  I  should  think  there  was  somewhere  in  the  neighborhood  of  fifteen  or 
twenty. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  clergyman  of  your  denomination,  out  of  Boston, 
who  stands,  in  your  judgment,  in  a  doubtful  position  on  this  subject  ? 

A.    I  really  do  not  know  what  you  would  mean  by  a  "  doubtful  position." 

Q.    Undeclared. 

A.  I  know  nothing  about  it,  except  the  impression  I  get  from  religious 
and  secular  papers ;  and  I  have  already  said  that  the  mass  of  Trinitarian 
Congregationalist  clergymen  throughout  the  Commonwealth  would  be  for  a 
prohibitory  law.  • 

Q.  How  would  it  be  with  the  communicants  of  your  church  in  and  out  of 
Boston? 

A .    I  do  not  know  as  to  that ;  I  could  not  answer. 
,    Q.    How  is  it  out  of  Boston  ? 

A '.  It  has  generally  been  represented  that,  out  of  the  city,  people  are  more 
for  a  prohibitory  law  than  in  Boston  or  in  the  large  towns ;  and  that  is  all  I 


116  APPENDIX. 

*• 

know.  I  think  that,  in  a  place  like  Boston,  it  is  more  difficult  to  carry  out 
the  system  of  prohibition  than  it  is  in  smaller  places. 

Q.     What  are  the  difficulties  ? 

A.  I  should  not  be  able  to  state  them;  there  are  many  facilities  for 
evading  the  law,  and  obtaining  liquor  in  a  city  of  this  size. 

Q.  The  respectable  men,  church  communicants,  do  not  wish  to  evade  the 
law? 

A .  I  do  not  speak  of  the  communicants,  but  of  people  generally ;  and  I 
was  going  to  say,  that  this  law  also  produces  other  evils,  worse  than  intem- 
perance, by  the  surreptitious  way  in  which  liquor  is  obtained. 

Q.  Then  you  are  inclined  to  think  that  the  surreptitious  means  by  which 
this  liquor  is  obtained  is  worse  than  intemperance  ? 

A.  I  think  there  were  some  things  connected  with  this  surreptitious  obtain- 
ing of  liquor  which  were  worse  in  their  tendency  than  intemperance. 

Q.    Would  you  like  an  open  bar  ? 

A.  I  should  say  that  I  should  like  a  large  liberty  in  the  use  of  every  com- 
bination of  elements  made  by  man,  and  each  man  using  under  God  that 
which  he  feels  that  he  ought  to  use  or  desires.  I  would  prefer  that  a  man 
should  use  that  which  he  feels  that  he  has  a  right  to  use,  openly  rather  than 
surreptitiously.  I  think  that  whatever  can  be  done  openly  and  accountably 
to  the  opinions  of  our  fellow  men  tends  more  to  temperance  than  making  a 
law  which  encourages  the  surreptitious  use  and  sale  of  any  article. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  as  to  the  licensed  seller  being  influenced  In  the 
sales  which  he  makes,  from  consideration  of  profits  ? 

A.  We  are  liable  to  have  our  hearts  influenced  by  our  views  of  our  own 
interests,  but  not  necessarily  wrongly  influenced. 

Q.    That  depends  upon  what  the  right  and  the  wrong  is,  does  it  not  ? 

A.    Certainly. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  that,  whatever  law  you  had,  you  would  desire  that  the 
law  should  operate  to  prevent  the  moderate  use  of  liquors  as  beverages  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;  I  think  I  would  say  that. 

Q.  Jf  then,  it  should  appear  to  the  law  officers,  for  example,  that  the 
existing  prohibitory  law  is  best  fitted  to  do  that  work,  you  would  prefer  that  ? 

A.  I  should  very  much  prefer  letting  all  combinations  of  elements  be  sold 
by  those  who  found  that  there  was  a  demand  for  them,  rather  than  by  laying 
any  restrictions  on  them.  My  habit  of  thinking  is  that  we  should  lessen  the 
trade  by  lessening  the  demand. 

Q.  It  seems  to  me  that  you  have  changed  ground.  This  last  proposition 
is  upon  the  unrestricted  sale.  Do  I  understand  that  you  are  against  all 
restrictions  of  the  sale  by  law,  of  liquor  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  that  is  the  reason  why  I  think  that  the  license  system  is  a  good 
one. 

Q.  Then  how  do  you  say  that  you  would  have  every  man  at  liberty  to  sell 
whatever  there  was  a  demand  for  ? 

A.    That  does  not  exclude  a  judicious  regulation. 

Q.  Then  why  would  you  exclude  ninety-nine  out  of  every  hundred  from 
selling  it,  and  yet  allow  the  hundredth  to  sell  it  ? 

A.    Because  it  might  be  expedient. 


APPENDIX.  117 

TESTIMONY  OP  REV.  PATRICK  STRAIN. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  CHILD.)    Where  do  you  reside,  and  what  is  your  calling  ? 

A.  I  am  a  Catholic  priest;  I  reside  in  Lynn  at  present;  I  have  had 
charge  of  the  church  in  Lynn  and  Chelsea  for  the  last  six  years. 

Q.  In  your  experience,  what  has  been  the  progress  of  intemperance 
during  the  last  ten  years  ? 

A.  I  think,  for  the  last  ten  years  it  has  been  slightly  increasing  in  Chelsea 
and  Lynn,  although  people  have  got  along  there,  generally,  pretty  well.  I 
think  intemperance  was  somewhat  increased  there  during  the  times  of 
excitement. 

Q.  Have  you  been  able  to  form  any  opinion  as  to  the  present  prohibitory 
system  of  legislation  in  regard  to  its  checking  the  progress  of  intemperance  ? 

A.  I  think  it  has  done  no  good.  I  think  the  people  generally  do  not 
respect  it,  nor  has  there  been  any  liquor  law  respected  by  the  people 
generally. 

Q.    How  is  it  as  to  the  sale  in  public  or  clandestine  places  ? 

A.  I  think  that,  publicly,  there  are  less  sales ;  but  I  think  that  for  every 
place  that  is  closed  up  there  is  one  or  more  that  takes  the  place  of  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  do  not  attribute  the  increase  to  law  or 
to  no  law  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  would  rather  attribute  the  increase  of  it  to  the  increase  of 
money  that  was  had. 

Q.    From  the  cause  of  the  war  ? 

A.    When  there  would  be  more  money,  there  would  be  more  drinking. 

Q.    The  general  influence  of  the  war  was  against  temperance  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that  you  do  not  believe  that  the  law  affected 
the  sale  and  use  of  liquor  favorably  or  unfavorably  ? 

A  ~V 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  in  favor  of  a  license  law,  particularly  ? 

A.  I  have  not  given  it  much  attention,  but  I  think  it  would  be  an  im- 
provement ? 

Q.  Can  you  state  the  ground  of  that  belief? 

A.  I  think  that  the  prohibitory  law  makes  people  hypocrites  and  deceitful. 

Q.  How  so  ? 

A.  By  pretending  to  be  good  people  and  not  having  it,  and  at  the  same 
time  having  it. 

Q.  They  could  do  that  under  any  law,  could  they  not  ? 

A.  With  a  license  law,  they  could  have  better  liquor. 

Q.  They  would  drink  it  with  some  confidence,  would  they  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  GEORGE  F.  BIGELOW,  M.  D. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  CHILD.)    You  reside  in  Boston  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    What  relations  and  connections  with  the  poor  have  you  ? 


118  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  am  secretary  of  the  Howard  Benevolent  Society,  and  have  been  for 
the  last  ten  years ;  and  I  have  been  connected  with  the  Washingtonian  Home, 
as  its  physician,  for  about  eight  years,  though  I  am  not  now ;  and  for  some 
years  I  was  connected  with  the  Boston  Dispensary. 

Q.  What  has  been  your  opportunity  for  observation  as  to  the  progress  of 
intemperance  within  the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years  ? 

A.  "Within  the  last  ten  years,  I  should  say  that  intemperance  had 
increased  in  Boston. 

Q,  What  opinion  have  you  as  to  the  effect  of  the  prohibitory  law  in  that 
respect  in  the  cause  of  temperance  and  for  the  prevention  of  drunkenness  ? 

A .  I  should  think,  as  I  say,  that  it  had  increased  under  the  operation  of 
the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  Were  you  a  member  of  the  legislature  when  the  law  of  1855  was 
passed  ? 

A.  I  voted  for  the  law  at  that  time,  thinking  it  was  desirable;  and 
though  it  was  not  exactly  what  I  desired,  yet  I  thought  it  was  the  best  thing 
that  we  could  have,  and  I  voted  for  it.  My  opinion  has  changed  since  that 
time,  and  has  led  me  to  believe  that  the  license  system  would  be  preferable 
to  any  other  form  of  prohibitory  law  that  has  existed  since  that  time. 

Q.  How  is  it  as  to  the  sale  and  the  number  of  places  in  which  liquor  is 
sold? 

A.  So  far  as  my  opportunities  of  judging  are  concerned,  I  should  say  the 
places  where  liquor  was  sold  have  increased  very  much  in  number. 

Q.  What  observation  have  you  had  in  regard  to  the  secresy  of  the  sale 
and  the  number  of  clandestine  places  of  sale  ? 

A .  I  can  only  say,  sir,  that  it  is  very  rare  that  I  have  occasion  to  call  for 
anything  of  the  kind  in  the  practice  of  my  profession,  that  it  is  not  almost 
immediately  produced,  and  sometimes  under  circumstances  that  surprise  me. 

(By  Mr.  JEWELL.)     Explain  that  ? 

A .  I  mean,  that  where  I  am  called  and  want  it  for  medicine,  I  find  that 
they  have  it  near  them,  and  if  it  is  not  in  the  house,  it  is  somewhere  close  by. 

Q.    Is  that  among  the  poorer  classes  ? 

A.     Among  the  poorer  classes  it  is  usually  found  on  the  spot. 

Q.     Among  the  poorer  classes,  is  it  accessible  by  all  of  them  ? 

A.     They  all  know  where  to  get  it. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     How  is  it  as  to  intemperance  in  families  ? 

A.  I  should  say  that  it  was  more  generally  diffused,  according  to  my  ob- 
servation, than  it  was  ten  years  ago.  I  find  other  members  of  families,  be- 
sides the  father  and  older  sons,  who  use  it.  I  see  it  among  the  female  portion 
of  families  more  than  I  used  to. 

Q.    How  is  it  as  to  the  children  ? 

A.  My  observation  is  more  limited  in  that  respect,  although  in  repeated 
instances  I  have  found  it  among  children  of  more  mature  age.  I  have  met  it 
among  the  children  of  the  schools,  who  were  in  the  habit  of  habitual  intoxi- 
cation. There  is  one  school  that  I  am  connected  with,  where  there  are  girls 
thirteen  or  fourteen  years  of  age  who  frequently  come  to  school  under  the 
influence  of  liquor,  and  frequently  have  to  be  sent  home. 


APPENDIX.  119 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  How  do  you  propose  to  regulate  the  sale  of 
liquors  ? 

A.  I  am  not  a  legislator,  but  it  has  seemed  to  me  that  if  a  license  could 
be  passed,  putting  the«  sale  of  liquor  into  the  hands  of  respectable  parties, 
placed  under  bonds,  and  in  sufficient  numbers,  it  would  be  an  improvement. 

Q.     What  do  you  mean  by  sufficient  number  ? 

A.  Sufficient  number  for  the  wants  of  the  community.  It  has  seemed  to 
me  that  the  law  was  so  much  at  variance  with  public  opinion  that  everybody 
winked  at  its  evasion. 

Q.  Are  you  not  speaking  unguardedly  in  speaking  of  Boston  as  a  unit  on 
that  subject  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  speak  of  it  as  it  seems  to  me  from  residence  here.  It  is 
simply  an  opinion. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  Do  you  mean  by  sufficient  numbers,  that  a  suffi- 
cient number  is  requisite  to  the  suppression  of  the  clandestine  sale  ? 

A.  So  far  as  that  is  concerned,  it  seems  to  me  that  if  it  is  placed  in  the 
hands  of  respectable  parties,  it  will  tend  to  suppress  the  clandestine  sale.  I 
think  the  history  of  the  prohibitory  law  shows  that  we  have  not  had  the 
same  advantage  which  we  ought  to  have  received. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Did  you  ever  know  of  a  license  law  where 
unlicensed  men  did  not  sell  as  numerously  ? 

A.  I  cannot  answer  the  question  positively.  I  only  answer  that  I  can  get 
it  more  freely  in  the  houses  of  my  patients,  than  before  the  prohibitory  law, 
and  I  think  that  the  drinking  has  increased,  and  that  the  clandestine  sale  has 
increased. 

Q.  Has  the  law  been  administered  in  Boston  previous  to  the  last  two 
years  ? 

A.    I  should  say  that  it  had  to  some  extent. 

Q.    What  extent  ? 

A.    That  I  have  not  the  means  of  knowing. 

Q.  Are  you  not  mistaken  in  supposing  that  it  has  really  been  executed  in 
.  Boston  ?  Are  you  aware  whether  or  not  a  single  conviction  as  a  common 
seller,  under  the  prohibitory  law,  has  taken  place  from  1855  to  1865. 

A.  I  could  not  say.  I  suppose  that  quite  a  number  of  arrests  and 
prosecutions  have  been  made. 

Q.    You  are  not  aware  that  a  single  conviction  has  been  made  ? 

A.    I  have  no  knowledge  on  that  subject. 

Q.  Suppose  we  had  a  stringent  license  law,  such  as  you  would  favor,  how 
would  it  be  as  to  the  children  becoming  intoxicated  ? 

A.  It  seems  to  me  that  by  limiting  the  sale  you  would  limit  the  oppor- 
tunities for  irresponsible  parties  to  obtain  alcoholic  liquors,  and  that  you 
would  be  able  to  take  hold  of  those  parties  who  did  sell,  if  they  abused  their 
privilege. 

Q.     Could  you  do  it  until  after  they  had  abused  their  privilege  ? 

A.    In  single  instances  probably  you  would  not. 

Q.  It  being  accessible  to  everybody  that  calls  for  it,  would  it  be  a  restraint 
upon  the  moderate  use  ? 

A.    I  think  it  would. 


120  APPENDIX. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  speak  of  intemperance  having  increased 
within  the  last  ten  years  ;  do  you  not  attribute  some  of  this  increase  to  the 
influence  of  the  war  ? 

A .  Undoubtedly  some  of  it  has  been  owing  to  that  f  ause.  I  cannot  con- 
ceive, however,  that  the  increase  should  be  so  much  in  cases  where  I  have 
seen  it  in  families. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Why  do  you  speak  of  the  people  furnishing  it 
clandestinely  in  these  cases  ? 

A.  Because  of  the  way  in  which  it  is  usually  produced  in  these  circum- 
stances, and  the  apparantly  guilty  look  with  which  it  is  produced. 

Q.  Betraying  a  consciousness  that  it  is  not  a  handsome  thing  to  have  liquor, 
and  that  public  opinion  is  against  it  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  that  public  opinion  is  against  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  You  say  that  you  voted  for  the  present  prohib- 
itory law,  and  that  you  were  then  in  favor  of  the  principle  upon  which  it  was 
founded  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir ;  the  principle  of  prohibition. 

Q.    Your  mind  has  undergone  a  change  upon  that  subject  ? 

A.    It  has,  sir. 

Q.     When  did  you  change  your  views  ? 

A.  It  has  been  a  gradual  change.  I  should  think  it  had  been  within  the 
last  two  years. 

Q.    If  the  law  could  be  enforced  you  would  still  be  in  favor  of  it  ? 

A.    I  can  hardly  suppose  such  a  state  of  things. 

Q.  I  wanted  to  see  whether  it  was  a  matter  of  principle  or  a  matter  of 
opinion.  In  principle  are  you  still  in  favor  of  prohibition  ? 

A.    I  am  not,  wholly,  because  I  think  it  is  a  violation  of  private  rights. 

Q.     Then  you  have  changed  your  opinion  as  to  the  principle  ? 

A .    Yes,  sir ;  I  have  changed  it  on  two  grounds. 

Q.  I  want  to  ask,  if  what  are  called  the  influential  classes  in  Boston  and 
in  the  Commonwealth  were  in  favor  of  the  execution  of  this  law,  whether 
you  think  there  would  be  any  serious  difficulty  in  enforcing  it ;  as,  for  instance : 
take  our  judges,  governors,  representatives,  senators,  physicians,  clergymen, 
and  such  men,  if  they  were  in  favor  of  it,  would  you  be  in  favor  of  it  ? 

A.    I  cannot  conceive  of  such  a  state  of  things.     I  could  not  answer. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  say  that  you  find  it  has  increased  where 
you  had  occasion  to  order  it.  Is  it  not  common  for  physicians  to  order  it  for 
many  purposes  ? 

A.     Under  various  circumstances  it  is  ordered  medicinally. 

Q.  Is  it  not  common  to  order  it  for  lung  complaints,  or  for  hemorrhage 
from  the  lungs  ? 

A.  It  is  not  common  to  order  it  for  hemorrhage,  but  it  is  frequently 
administered  for  lung  complaints. 

Q.  Now  if  I  keep  it  in  my  house  constantly,  is  that  evidence  that  I 
use  it  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  I  spoke  of  that  matter  in  contrast  with  the  state  of  things  ten  or  fif- 
teen years  ago.  Some  years  ago,  I  was  frequently  obliged  to  wait  some  time 
before  a  small  quantity  of  ardent  spirits  could  be  got  from  some  distance. 


APPENDIX.  121 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  EDWARD  T.  TAYLOR. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     How  long  have  you  been  in  Boston  ? 

A.     Oh,  not  very  long;  only  about  fifty  years. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  a  minister  in  Boston  ? 

A.  About  forty-five  years.  Between  thirty  and  forty  years  settled  as  I 
am  now. 

Q.  Where  has  been  the  principal  field  of  your  administration  within  that 
last  period  ? 

A.    North  Square — about  the  head  of  everywhere. 

Q.     Have  you  had  anything  to  do  with  sailors  during  that  period  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  From  my  boyhood  I  have  been  linked  in  with  them,  and 
expect  to  be  until  the  time  when  we  will  go  aloft  together. 

Q.  What  has  been  your  observation  as  to  the  progress  of  intemperance 
during  the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years  ? 

A.     There  has  been  a  very  great  improvement. 

Q.    What  caused  this  improvement  among  your  people  ? 

A.  An  increased  ardor  and  obedience  to  conscience  and  the  laws  of 
God,  not  for  the  stronger  to  leave  the  weaker  to  be  devoured  by  the  wolves 
that  seek  those  who  are  not  able  to  defend  themselves. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  number  of  places  where  these  wolves  are,  how  has  it 
been  during  the  last  five  years  ? 

A.  Multitudinous.  I  should  think  there  was  about  a  breastwork  from  the 
Square  down  to  Charlestown  Bridge.  I  believe  that  the  rum-houses  are 
scarcely  out  of  sight  one  from  the  other.  We  have  a  plenty  of  idlers. 
Whether  they  live  on  air  or  steam,  I  know  not. 

Q.  What  has  the  influence  of  that  great  number  of  places  been  upon  the 
habit  of  the  people  in  regard  to  temperance  ?  Do  they  lead  astray  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Everything  that  possibly  can  be  done  is  done.  These 
people  are  followed  from  the  houses  to  the  ship,  and  when  no  other  vessel  can 
be  obtained  to  go  aboard,  the  bewitching  matter,  they  will  have  it  in  a 
bladder. 

Q.  Has  there  been  any  diminution  of  these  places  since  the  prohibitory 
law  passed  twelve  or  fifteen  years  ago  ? 

A.    Prohibitory  law !    I  did  not  know  that  they  had  one. 

Q.  Have  these  places  for  the  last  twelve  or  fifteen  years  been  constantly 
increasing  or  not  ? 

A.  I  think  they  have  not  died  with  age.  They  remain,  and  they  are 
exceedingly  plenty.  It  is  painful  to  the  eye  to  go  down  our  street — North 
Street — until  we  get  down  to  North  Square,  and  see  both  sides  barricaded 
with  bottles  in  plenty,  and  plenty  of  loafers  lying  around  them  that  cannot 
get  a  living  honestly,  and  must  take  it  from  somebody  else. 

Q.    Are  you  in  favor  of  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  By  no  means.  I  have  no  right  to  punish  the  righteous  with  the 
wicked,  and  I  ought,  I  suppose,  to  give  a  reason  why.  I  think,  sir,  that  a 
hotel  is  for  something  else  besides  setting  a  table  and  making  a  bed.  With 
rapid  and  hard  travelling,  getting  dow,n  to  this  our  unequalled  and  blessed  city, 
travellers  are  racked  and  tortured  with  their  long  journeying.  When  they 
get  here  they  are  liable,  in  our  sudden  changes,  to  contract  diseases ;  and  I 
16 


122  APPENDIX. 

believe  that  no  landlord  ought  to  be  allowed  to  keep  a  house  merely  for 
furnishing  beef  and  potatoes,  but  he  must  take  care  of  the  health  of  his 
guests ;  and  while  he  has  nothing  in  his  house  to  supply  them,  and  while  he  is 
sending  for  a  doctor,  disease  may  get  beyond  recovery.  The  landlord  ought 
to  take  care  of  his  lodgers,  and  should  be  able  to  take  care  of  them  until 
greater  wisdom  is  brought.  That  is  my  explanation.  I  am  willing  everybody 
should  have  it.  I  have  never  needed  such  things  myself,  but  every  man  was 
not  made  with  such  a  hide  as  I  was,  for  I  have  seen  noble  men  faint  away. 
It  was  only  four  years  ago  that  I  was  in  Canada,  where  a  number  of  our 
hard-working  business  men  were  getting  a  little  recreation,  and  they  were  so 
conscientious  about  temperance  that  two  or  three  persons  lost  their  lives  by 
getting  heated  from  walking  and  then  drinking  the  lime-water  that  they  have 
there,  for  lime-water  is  all  through  that  region.  Two  or  three  of  these 
abstainers  came  to  me  and  asked  me  what  to  do.  I  said  to  them,  use  a  little 
brandy.  But  they  were  so  conscientious  upon  that  point  that  they  would  not. 
They  soon  passed  away.  This  lime-water  is  in  Cincinnati,  and  a  good  many 
places,  and  many  a  noble  young  man  or  woman  is  taken  away  from  want  of 
wisdom  on  this  subject.  Therefore  I  think  it  would  be  out  of  the  question  to 
forbid  the  use  or  the  sale  of  spirit  in  all  cases.  This  prohibitory  law  shuts  us 
in.  Moreover  there  is  something  else  in  this  matter.  I  should  not  want  to 
deny  my  God.  The  good  book  tells  us  that  wine  cheereth  the  heart  of  God  and 
man.  I  should  not  want  to  raise  my  hand  against  the  hand  of  God.  And  I 
should  not  want  to  think  that  the  world  was  so  reduced ;  and  I  do  not  believe 
we  are  so  lost  in  the  world.  Yet  for  my  own  part  I  have  not  had  use  for 
these  things ;  but  everybody  is  not  so. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  not  know  that  this  necessity  of  which 
you  speak  is  supplied  by  the  present  prohibitory  law  ? 

Q.     (By  Mr.  TAYLOR.)     What  ?     Have  you  got  a  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     Yes,  sir. 

A.  Well,  then,  it  must  have  a  good  many  pockets.  These  glass  jars,  set  in 
straw,  are  very  easy  things  to  carry,  and  it  is  very  easy  to  get  them  filled. 

Q.  Under  the  prohibitory  law,  you  said  that  the  sale  was  allowed  for  nec- 
essary purposes  ? 

A.  I  am  opposed  to  the  present  law,  which  opens  the  door  everywhere  to 
the  most  worthless  beings  to  sell  liquor  ;  and,  it  seems  to  me,  that  the  more 
worthless  the  being,  the  more  liberty  he  has. 

Q.  You  have  lived  in  Boston  fifty  years,  and  have  lived  here  under  the 
license  system.  Do  you  not  know  that  anybody  who  pleased  sold  without 
a  license  at  that  time  ? 

A.    I  believe  they  did. 

Q.  How  would  a  license  law  restrain  it,  if  it  was  enforced  as  it  was 
before  ? 

A.  I  suppose  the  effect  would  be  just  the  same,  and  just  what  it  ought  to 
be,  under  a  consistent  license  law,  with  something  at  the  back  of  that  law  to 
carry  that  law  out ;  not  making  a  law  and  putting  it  into  the  cradle  and  rock- 
ing it  with  a  lullaby.;  but  letting  it  have  a  power  and  force  and  meaning  in 
it. 


APPENDIX.  123 

Q.  I  should  like  to  ask  you  how  a  license  law  is  going  to  be  enforced 
against  these  unlicensed  sellers  any  better  than  the  present  law  ? 

A.  I  should  think  that  people  would  learn  by  experience  on  this  subject, 
that  there  is  some  difference  between  such  a  prudent,  talented,  honest,  ener- 
getic man  to  use  that  fiery  concern,  and  when  it  is  let  out  to  everybody ;  and 
perhaps  if  a  good,  clever  fellow  goes  and  makes  a  complaint  to-day,  he 
may  get  in  a  narrow  place  to-morrow. 

Q.    I  understand  you  to  say  that  they  do  sell  it  everywhere  ? 

A .  I  never  knew  that  we  ever  did  have  a  very  restricting  law ;  for  it  never 
did  work  much,  and  I  suppose  it  was  never  expected  to  do  much. 

Q.  Have  you  known  of  any  attempts  to  work  it  in  Boston  that  seemed  to 
you  intended  to  make  it  worse  ? 

A.  I  think  I  have  never  seen  anything  from  it  worthy  of  the  dignity  of  a 
law. 

'TESTIMONY  OF  ALBERT  G.  GOODWIN. 

Q.    (By  Mr  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.    In  Worcester  Street,  in  this  city. 

Q.    With  what  charitable  association  are  you  associated  ? 

A.     The  Boston  Provident  Association. 

Q.    Does  that  bring  you  in  connection  with  the  poor  ? 

A .     Yes ;  every  day  and  every  hour  of  the  day. 

Q.  What  has  been  your  observation,  for  the  last  ten  years,  as  to  the  pro- 
gress of  intemperance  here  ? 

A.    I  think  it  has  been  steadily  on  the  increase,  within  my  observation. 

Q.     How  is  it  with  regard  to  the  places  where  liquor  is  obtained  ? 

A.  I  think  the  places  where  it  is  procured  are  now  more  in  attics  and 
cellers,  and  it  is  sold  by  the  pint  and  gallon  at  the  retail  stores. 

Q.  Have  you,  from  your  observation,  been  able  to  form  an  opinion  as  to 
eifectofthe  present  law,  as  compared  with  the  effect  properly  of  a  license 
law? 

A.  I  have  thought  very  much  upon  the  question,  and  was  much  rejoiced 
when  the  present  law  was  passed ;  but  still  the  evil  increased  and  increased 
(from  my  observation,)  and  I  should  say,  if  I  were  asked  here,  that  we  should 
try  something  else,  and  that  is  a  stringent  license  law. 

Q.  Your  opinion  upon  this  matter  has  changed,  then,  if  I  understand 
you? 

A.    It  certainly  has. 

Q.  And  you  believe  that  a  license  law  would  be  a  better  system  at  the 
present  time  ? 

A.    I  would  like  to  see  it  tried. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     How  long  have  you  lived  in  Boston  ? 

A.    About  fifteen  or  eighteen  years. 

Q.    You  did  not  live  here  when  we  were  under  a  license  law  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  anything  of  the  condition  of  things  while  we  were 
under  a  license  law  ? 


124  APPENDIX. 

A.  No.  I  was  constantly  at  sea  at  that  time,  and  I  knew  nothing  about 
the  laws  of  the  country,  hardly.  I  have  taken  a  great  interest  (as  much  as 
any  man,  I  think,)  in  the  cause  of  temperance  of  late  years,  and  I  am  sorry 
to  say  it  seems  to  have  got  beyond  the  power  of  man  almost.  Without  some 
kind  of  legislation,  I  feel  that  we  are  like  a  ship  upon  the  rocks,  where  the 
master  knows  not  what  to  do,  and  he  is  willing  to  take  the  advice  almost 
of  fools. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  How  many -years  have  you  been  an  active  tem- 
perance man  ? 

A.    With  the  exception  of  two  years,  twenty-five  years. 

Q.    Do  you  mean  by  temperance,  total  abstinence  or  moderate  use  ? 

A.    I  mean  total  abstinence  from  everything  that  intoxicates. 

Q.  How  extensively  have  gentlemen  holding  total  abstinence  views,  and 
who  favored  the  existing  law,  changed  their  opinions  and  favored  a  license 
system,  so  far  as  you  know  ? 

A.    I  do  not  suppose  a  great  many  of. them  have. 

Q.  Have  you  been  acquainted,  during  your  residence  in  Boston,  with 
many  total  abstinence  men  ? 

A.    I  think  I  have,  more  so  than  I  have  with  the  other  class. 

Q.     So  far  as  you  know,  they  are  still  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  should  think  many  of  them  were,  for  this  reason,  that  many  of  them 
feel  that  it  is  more  for  their  own  protection  than  for  the  multitude. 

Q.    Do  you  mean  that  they  are  reformed  men  ? 

A.    Yes. 

Q.  Have  you  any  acquaintance  with  men,  who  are  total  abstinence  men, 
who  have  not  changed  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;  many. 

Q.    And  do  you  find  them  still  in  favor  of  sustaining  the  present  law  ? 

A.    I  cannot  say  that  I  do. 

Q,    Do  you  find  many  otherwise  ? 

A.    Yes;  many. 

Q.    What  fraction  ? 

A.    I  should  think,  certainly,  over  half. 

Q.    Dp  you  speak  of  men  who  are  still  active  in  the  temperance  cause  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  speak  generally  of  the  citizens  of  Boston  with  whom  I  am 
acquainted. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  half  of  the  citizens  in  Boston  to  be  on  the  total 
abstinence  principle  ? 

A.  That  is  putting  a  question  which  no  man  can  answer.  I  said  half  of 
the  men  that  I  knew ;  for  I  certainly  do  not  know  half  of  the  citizens  of 
Boston. 

Q.  Are  there  total  abstainers  who  have  changed  their  opinions,  and  still 
are  active  in  any  temperance  organization  ? 

A.    Oh,  yes. 

Q.  What  temperance  organization  do  you  know,  more  than  half  of  which 
— excepting,  if  you  please,  the  Suffolk  Temperance  Union — are  opposed  to 
the  present  law  ? 


APPENDIX.  125 

A.  I  think  more  than  half  of  them  are  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law. 
When  I  said  half  of  my  general  acquaintance  in  Boston,  I  should  say  that 
over  half  are  not  in  favor  of  it. 

Q.  But  you  do  not  know  any  temperance  organization,  more  than  half 
of  which  are  not  in  favor  of  the  present  law  ? 

A.    No. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)    You  used  to  follow  the  sea  ? 

A.    I  did,  thirty  years  ago. 

Q.  How  are  the  habits  of  the  seamen  now,  compared  with  your  early 
experience  ? 

A.    As  a  class  they  are  as  different  as  light  from  darkness. 

Q.    Improved  or  degenerated  ? 

A.    Degenerated. 

Q.    You  have  not  followed  the  sea  for  the  last  fifeeen  years  t 

A.    No. 

Q.    But  you  did  before  that  ? 

A.  I  have  been  in  the  habit  of  visiting  ships  lately,  that  arrived  in  the 
harbor,  and  I  have  thus  been  able  to  compare  the  habits  of  sailors. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  habits  of  seamen,  forty  years  ago,  were 
better  than  now  ? 

A.    Yes. 

Q.    Did  not  everybody  drink  then  ? 

A.  No.  For  sixteen  years,  I  was  master  of  a  ship;  and  I  defy  any  man 
to  say  that  I  ever  brought  up  a  bottle  to  give  a  sailor. 

Q.     What  years  ? 

A.    From  1825  to  1840. 

Q.    Do  you  remember  when  this  reform  commenced  ? 

A.    I  was  then  at  sea. 

Q.  Were  not  rations  furnished  to  almost  every  one  by  the  merchants  of 
Boston,  forty  years  ago  ? 

A.    When  I  first  went  out  they  were. 

Q.    How  is  it  now  ? 

A.     They  are  not  now  furnished,  I  think. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  .  Do  sailors  drink  more  ashore  now  than  they  used 
to? 

A.  I  think  they  do.  I  do  not  say  they  have  greater  facilities,  but  they  are 
a  different  class  of  people.  But  since  we  have  got  our  School  Ship  I  hope 
they  will  go  back  to  the  better  state  of  things. 

TESTIMONY  OF  KEV.  J.  B.  O'HAGAN. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)    Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.  At  St.  Mary's,  Endicot  Street,  in  this  city.  j  ,     < 

Q.  Have  you  the  charge  of  the  church  ? 

A.  I  am  assistant  pastor. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  there  ?  <  f  T  V    ( > 

A.  Eighteen  months. 

'  Q.    Where  before  ?  \;A  1  A  F<  } .  , 

>^ 


126  APPENDIX. 

A.  In  the  army  of  the  Potomac,  with  the  exception  of  a  year  spent  at  the 
Georgetown  College. 

Q.  What  has  been  the  result  of  your  observation  in  Boston,  as  to  the  effect 
of  the  present  law  in  promoting  temperance  ? 

A.  I  cannot  form  a  comparative  judgment.  My  judgment  is  that  the  law- 
is  a  failure.  About  a  week  ago  last  Monday,  the  State  Constables  came  to 
our  part  of  the  city  and  seized  liquors  there,  all  they  could  find  in  the  various 
places  where  it  was  kept.  I  observed  that  within  five  minutes  after  the  con- 
stables had  gone,  they  were  concerned  in  selling  in  the  same  shops  again.  I 
presume  they  had  the  liquors  secreted.  I  was  passing  through  Haymarket 
Square  in  the  afternoon,  and  I  heard  a  gentlemen  remark  that  he  saw  more 
drunken  men  that  day  than  for  eight  months  before. 

Q.  How  is  it,  as  to  the  places  where  liquor  can  be  got,  whether  directly  or 
clandestinely  ? 

A.  I  think  since  this  law  has  been  put  in  force,  it  has  been  kept  and  sold 
furtively,  and  I  think  it  has  added  to  the  intemperance  of  the  community, 
particularly  among  women,  who,  in  the  absence  of  their  husbands,  get  together 
and  get  drunk. 

Q.     Have  you  seen  any  children  made  intemperate  by  it  ? 

A.  No.  There  is  not  a  great  deal  of  intemperance  among  the  older  class, 
but  there  are  some  women,  and  some  men,  also.  Those  who  attend  our 
church  regularly  are  not  addicted  to  intemperance  now.  But  I  do  not 
consider  that  so  much  the  effect  of  the  law  as  of  our  organization. 

Q.     What  is  your  organization  ? 

A.  I  have  an  organization  of  about  three  hundred  married  persons,  and 
nearly  all  total  abstinence  men. 

Q.    In  those  efforts  which  you  have  exerted  have  you  found  success  ? 

A.  Yes;  I  found  religious  influences  far  more  effective  than  prohibition. 
I  have  found  that  prohibition  generally  excites  opposition  on  the  part  of  many. 

Q.  From  your  observation  have  you  formed  any  opinion  as  to  the 
probability  or  possibility  of  preventing  the  sale  ? 

A.    I  do  not  think  it  possible,  from  my  present  observation. 

Q.     Does  the  present  law  retard  or  aid  your  efforts  ? 

A.    I  think  it  retards  moral  efforts,  rather  than  aids  them. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  MICHAEL  HARTNEY. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)    Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.    In  Salem. 

Q.    Your  calling  ? 

A.  I  am  a  Catholic  clergyman,  pastor  of  the  Church  of  the  Immaculate 
Conception. 

Q.    How  long  have  you  been  there  ? 

A.    Since  August,  1857. 

Q.    Where,  before  that? 

A.    I  commenced  my  career  as  a  clergyman  at  that  time. 

Q.  What  has  been  your  observation  as  to  the  progress  and  state  of 
intemperance  during  that  period  among,  not  your  own  flock  alone,  but 
generally  ? 


APPENDIX.  127 

A.  Before  giving  my  opinion,  I  should  state,  that  I  do  not  like  to  be  iden- 
tified with  any  party  at  this  hearing,  either  with  the  liquor  party  or  anti-liquor 
party.  I  would  state  that  my  own  people,  I  consider,  to  be  an  orderly,  sober, 
.  temperate  people.  I  do  not  attribute  that,  however,  to  the  working  of  the 
prohibitory  law.  I  attribute  it  to  their  attendance  to  their  religious  duties  as 
Catholics.  I  believe  that,  if  a  Catholic  attends  to  his  religious  duties,  and 
observes  the  precepts  of  the  church,  he  will  not  be  a  drunkard.  That  is  my 
experience.  Of  course,  there  are  some  persons  who  drink  and  get  drunk,  no 
doubt ;  but  I  say  that,  as  a  general  thing,  my  people  are  orderly  and  sober. 
With  regard  to  the  working  of  the  prohibitory  law,  it  is  my  opinion  that 
it  has  proved  a  failure.  With  regard,  to  my  opinion  as  to  a  license  law,  I 
would  state  that  I  would  approve  any  law  which  would  best  diminish  the  evils 
of  intemperance  and  liquor-selling.  In  my  opinion,  a  license  law  tends  to 
diminish  the  abuse  of  liquor-selling  rather  than  a  prohibitory  law,  for  this 
simple  reason,  that  I  think  it  is  in  human  nature  not  to  care  much  about  what 
it  is  easy  to  obtain.  If  a  man  finds  that  he  is  prohibited  from  doing  a  thing, 
it  is  in  corrupt  human  nature  to  say  he  will  have  it.  I  think  a  license  law  will 
put  down  many  low  groggeries,  and  diminish,  to  a  great  extent,  the  results 
of  private  and  furtive  sale  of  liquors,  especially  in  large  cities. 

Q.  (By.  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  spoke  of  the  temperate  habits  of  your 
people.  Do  you  attribute  that,  in  a  great  measure,  in  addition  to  religious 
influences,  to  the  personal  example  of  the  clergy  and  leading  men  ? 

A.    Yes.    That  does  a  great  deal  towards  it. 

Q.  The  idea  has  been  expressed  that  moderate  drinking  is  temperance. 
When  your  clergy  speak  of  temperance,  do  they  mean  total  abstinence  or  the 
moderate  use  ? 

A.  I  think  that  temperance,  according  to  the  general  acceptation,  means 
total  abstinence  ;  but,  if  I  were  asked  what  temperance  is,  I  would  say  it  is 
a  moderate  use  of  anything  eaten  or  drank. 

Q.    Then  your  idea  of  temperance  is  that  it  is  not  total  abstinence  ? 

A.    Yes. 

Q.     Is  that  so  understood  among  your  clergy  ? 

A.  Among  the  people,  they  say  that,  if  they  wish  to  take  a  pledge,  they 
take  the  total  abstinence  pledge. 

Q.  Do  they  consider  a  man  a  temperance  man,  who  is  in  the  habit  of  using 
liquor  and  does  not  abuse  it  ? 

A.  They  consider  him  a  temperate  man,  and  not  a  temperance  man.  I 
think  that  distinction  is  made. 

Q.  If  not  improper,  I  would  like  to  know  whether  your  clergy  practise 
total  abstinence  or  a  moderate  use  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say ;  I  do  not  know  what  the  clergy  do.  They  practise  tem- 
perance, so  far  as  I  know. 

Q.    Did  you  ever  take  the  temperance  pledge  ? 

A.    Never. 

TESTIMONY  OP  MAYOR  OTIS  NORCROSS. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  CHILD.)    You  are  one  of  the  petitioners,  are  you  not? 
A.    No,  sir;  I  think  not. 


128  APPENDIX. 

Q.    You  are  Mayor  of  Boston  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Your  opinion  you  recommend  in  your  inaugural  address  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  any  reasons  which  you  may  have  for 
your  opinion  ? 

A.  From  my  general  observation  while  I  was  connected  with  the  city 
government — 

Q.    How  long  a  time  was  that  ? 

A.  I  was  alderman  three  years,  commencing  in  1862.  Since  that  I  have 
been  intimately  acquainted  with  the  city  government  ? 

Q.     State  in  your  own  way- your  observation  in  reference  to  this  subject  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  my  views  are,  that  the  present  prohibitory  law  has  been 
inoperative,  because  the  public  sentiment  was  not  with  it.  It  was  not  the 
wish  of  the  mass  of  the  people  that  it  should  be  carried  out  ? 

Q.  I  would  inquire  your  opinion  as  to  a  properly  constructed  license  law, 
as  compared  with  the  present  law,  and  as  to  the  execution  of  the  one  or  the 
other,  and  which  would  best  restrain  the  effects  of  intoxication  ? 

A.  I  think  a  license  law  would  be  better.  I  think  that  experience  has 
proved  the  other  to  be  inoperative.  Our  city  government  filled  the  courts 
with  complaints  under  the  law.  There  was  a  difficulty  in  convicting,  and  the 
time  of  the  courts  was  so  much  consumed  that  the  District- Attorney  requested 
the  Chief  of  Police  not  to  put  any  more  cases  into  court.  I  think,  with  a 
proper  license  law,  we  could  enforce  it. 

Q.  I  would  be  glad  to  know  how  confidently  you  hold  your  opinion. 
State  what  kind  of  a  license  law  you  think  can  be  enforced  ? 

A.  I  cannot  go  into  the  details.  It  should  generally  restrain  the  sale ;  not 
allow  it  to  be  sold  on  Sundays ;  not  allow  it  to  be  sold  to  minors,  or  to  per- 
sons known  to  be  in  the  habit  of  making  improper  use  of  it.  Various 
restrictions  of  that  kind,  I  think,  would  be  desirable.  Licenses  should  be 
given  only  to  persons  of  reputation  and  character.  My  own  view  of  it  is 
that  the  right  might  be  given  to  each  town  or  city  in  the  Commonwealth  to 
adopt  the  license  law  or  retain  the  present  law.  And  I  would  have  the 
punishment  for  violation  the  same  as  in  the  present  law. 

Q.  In  regard  to  license,  would  you  have  any  fixed  time  to  continue,  or 
make  them  subject  to  revocation  ? 

A.  I  think  they  should  be  subject  to  revocation  whenever,  in  the  judg- 
ment of  the  mayor  and  aldermen,  it  was  thought  expedient. 

Q.  With  such  a  law  in  force,  what,  in  your  judgment,  would  be  the  effect 
as  to  breaking  up  the  unauthorized  places  ? 

A.    I  have  no  doubt  that  it  could  be  done. 

Q.    That  is  your  opinion  very  strongly,  that  you  could  enforce  it  ? 

A.    That  is  my  opinion. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  effect  of  a  law,  executed  in  that  manner,  upon 
intemperate  habits  and  the  excessive  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.  I  think  it  would  be  a  great  improvement.  I  think  the  difficulties  are 
now  so  great,  and  these  drinking  places  are  so  common,  that  when  a  man  gets 
his  pay  for  his  week's  work,  he  is  enticed  into  them,  because  they  are  open  at 


APPENDIX.  129 

almost  every  step  in  the  street.  I  think  the  effect  would  be,  if  we  break  up 
these  places,  to  drive  out  of  the  business  a  class  of  persons  who  sell  inferior 
spirits  of  all  kinds. 

Q,.  What  is  your  view  with  regard  to  the  public  sentiment  against  the 
execution  of  this  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  My  own  experience  is  that  a  large  majority  are  opposed  to  the  present 
law.  They  think  it  is  a  failure.  To  be  sure,  a  few  State  Constables  have 
made  arrests  and  broken  up  a  few  places ;  but  it  amounts  to  nothing.  They 
have  not  taken  hold  of  any  persons  of  consequence.  It  is  only  a  few  unim- 
portant persons.  There  has  been  a  great  noise,  but  at  the  same  time  I  do  not 
think  it  has  effected  much.  Drunkenness  increases,  according  to  the  reports. 

Q.  How  is  it  as  to  the  number  of  arrests  for  drunkenness,  as  reported  by 
the  police,  for  the  last  week  or  ten  days  V 

A.  There  have  been  more  at  the  station-houses.  I  recollect  that  on  one 
day,  within  a  week,  the  number  was  less.  As  a  general  rule  the  number  is 
about  the  same  from  day  to  day. 

Q.  Has  there  been  no  diminution  under  the  operations  of  the  State 
Constables  ? 

A .    I  do  not  see  that  there  has. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SpoosfER.)  You  say  the  operations  of  the  State  Constables 
amount  to  nothing  ? 

A.    I  do  not  think  they  have  much  effect  upon  the  great  question. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware,  that  according  to  Mr.  Kurtz's  report,  there  are  five 
hundred  less  places  where  liquors  are  sold  in  Boston,  than  there  were  before 
the  constabulary  law  went  into  operation  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  is  very  material.  The  important  question  is,  how 
many  are  arrested  for  drunkenness  ?  I  was  not  aware  of  the  fact  which  you 
refer  to.  I  think  it  is  about  two  hundred  less  than  it  was  a  year  ago. 

Q.  How  many  persons  would  you  probably  license,  supposing  the  mayor 
and  aldermen  had  it  at  their  discretion  ? 

A.  That  is  a  very  important  question,  and  would  require  a  great  deal  of 
consideration.  I  have  never  considered  it. 

Q.     Could  not  you  guess  ? 

A .     That  is  too  important  a  question  to  decide  by  a  guess. 

Q.    You  recommend  a  license  law  ? 

A.    Yes. 

Q.     Do  you  think  you  would  license  three  hundred  ? 

A.  I  could  not  tell,  and  should  prefer  not  to  state,  as  I  have  not  given  the 
matter  sufficient  consideration. 

Q.  You  say  the  law  was  not  enforced,  because  the  courts  had  more  cases 
than  they  could  attend  to  ? 

A.  That  was  the  fact  when  I  was  on  the  board  of  aldermen,  and  I  think 
it  is  so  now. 

Q.     Do  you  know  how  many  cases  they  have  now  ? 

A.    I  do  not. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  the  present  State  Constables  have  found  more  cases, 
and  that  they  have  no  trouble  in  disposing  of  them  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know. 
17 


130  APPENDIX. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  Are  there  not  twenty-nine  hundred  cases  now 
awaiting  sentence  in  Suffolk  County  ? 

A.     I  am  not  conversant  with  the  statistics. 

Q.  You  say  the  trouble  was  because  the  courts  were  so  full.  I  wish  to 
show  that  the  facts  prove  that  the  constables  have  furnished  more  cases  than 
the  police  did,  and  that  there  have  been  many  more  convictions. 

A.     I  do  not  know  how  that  is. 

Q.     Supposing  that  to  be  true,  what  do  you  make  of  the  trouble  ? 

A.    I  only  state  the  fact  as  it  was ;  I  cannot  go  into  any  argument  about  it. 

Q.  There  used  to  be  two  thousand  places  where  they  sold.  If  you  license 
five  hundred  will  that  not  fill  the  courts  ? 

A.  You  say  that  the  present  law  convicts,  and  we  can  use  the  same 
machinery  to  convict  under  a  license  law. 

Q.  You  gave  a  statement  that  it  is  your  opinion  that  intemperance 
increases,  because  the  number  of  drunkards  is  greater  now.  What  is  your 
reason  for  thinking  so  ? 

A.  The  Deputy  Chief  has  made  a  table,  from  which  I  can  give  a  few 
figures.  According  to  his  estimates  in  1856,  there  were  seventeen  thousand 
called  lodgers ;  nine  thousand  were  lodgers,  and  the  rest  were  put  in  for 
drunkenness.  In  1866  there  were  twenty-seven  thousand,  of  which  ten  thou- 
sand and  fifty  were  lodgers,  and  the  rest  were  arrested  for  drunkenness.  He 
has  classified  the  cases,  classing  those  Avho  were  slightly  intoxicated  as  lodgers. 

Q.  Have  you  not  the  fact  in  your  mind  that  three  years  ago  there  were 
some  seventeen  thousand  and  more  ? 

A .     I  have  not  given  my  mind  to  that  particularly  ;  I  cannot  say. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  I  would  like  to  inquire  as  regards  the  character  of 
the  city  government  now,  compared  with  any  previous  one  ? 

A.     I  have  no  doubt  it  will  compare  favorably  with  any  former  government. 

Q.     Has  the  liquor  traffic  any  peculiar  control  over  the  city  government  ? 

A.    I  am  not  aware  that  it  has. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)  Does  your  memory  run  back  to  the  time  of  the 
license  law  ? 

A.    Not  distinctly. 

Q.  You  don't  remember  whether  the  unlicensed  were  prosecuted  by  the 
licensed  ? 

A.  I  did  not  take  interest  enough  in  public  matters  at  that  time  to 
remember. 

Q-  {By  Mr.  FAY.)  Would  you  favor  the  licensing  of  any  open  bar  in 
Boston  ? 

A.  That  depends  upon  circumstances.  It  is  a  question  which  I  should 
prefer  to  consider  before  giving  any  definite  answer. 

Q.    You  are  so  far  convinced  that  you  would  license  hotels  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  that  the  hotels  should  be  licensed,  if  kept  by 
respectable  men.  I  should  not  wish  to  express  an  opinion  beyond  that. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  Would  you  regard  that  as  a  reputable  hotel,  what- 
ever be  its  size,  in  which  twice,  within  two  years,  there  have  been  rows,  where 
hats  were  smashed  -down  over  the  heads  of  inoffensive  persons  entering  the 
hotel? 


APPENDIX.  131 

A.  That  might  be  answered  by  asking,  if  in  the  House  of  Representatives 
two  men  should  get  into  a  quarel,  and  they  break  down  each  other's  hats, 
whether  that  should  be  a  respectable  building  or  not.  Oftentimes,  men  in 
very  respectable  places  get  to  quarrelling,  but  it  does  not  follow  that  the  place 
is  therefore  disgraceful. 

Q.     What  is  the  object  of  getting  convictions  in  the  county  of  Suffolk  ? 

A.  That  is  a  question  that  I  should  have  to  refer  you  to  the  law  officers  to 
answer ;  it  is  a  thing  that  docs  not  come  into  the  view  of  the  Aldermen.  After 
the  complaint  has  been  made,  that  is  for  the  law  officers  to  settle. 

Q.  Is  it  possible  that,  as  Mayor  of  the  city,  or  as  an  Alderman,  you  are  not 
conversant  with  the  difficulty  of  executing  the  prohibitory  law  in  question  ? 

A.     Certainly,  sir;  I  am  conversant  with  the  difficulty. 

Q.     And  you  know  where  the  difficulty  rests  ? 

A.  The  difficulty  was  in  getting  convictions,  but  I  cannot  tell  the  precise 
point. 

Q.  Was  there  any  difficulty  in  getting  the  writ  served  against  the 
trafficker  ? 

A.     I  suppose  not 

Q.     In  getting  the  attorney  to  plead  the  case  ? 

A.    I  suppose  not. 

Q.     With  the  ruling  of  the  judge  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know. 

Q.     In  getting  verdicts  of  conviction  from  the  jurors  ? 

A.     I  supposed  that  the  difficulty  was  with  the  juries. 

Q.     Are  you  aware  that  the  juries  do  disagree  in  these  cases  ? 

A .  I  am  aware  that  they  did ;  I  am  aware  that  there  were  technicalities 
by  which  many  did  escape ;  and  I  think  a  large  number  escaped  in  that  way. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  liquor-sellers  were  put  into  the  jury  lists  by  the 
the  Board  of  Aldermen  confessedly  ? 

A .     No,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  members  of  the  Board  of  Aldermen  have  testified, 
•before  different  committees  of  the  Legislature,  that  they  did  select  liquor- 
sellers  knowingly,  and  saying,  if  you  don't  wish  us  to  do  that,  make  a  law  to 
the  contrary  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  statement  is  a  slander  upon  the  Board  of  Alderman, 
or  upon  any  reputable  city  government. 

Q.  I  would  ask  the  question  of  the  Honorable  Mayor,  whether,  as  Mayor 
of  the  city  government  at  any  period,  or  whether  as  a  citizen  of  Boston  at 
any  period,  during  the  last  fifteen  years,  he  has  been  aware  that  liquor-sellers, 
known  to  be  such,  were  selected  by  men  that  knew  them  to  be  such,  and  their 
names  put  into  the  list  whence  the  traverse  juries  were  to  be  drawn  ? 

A.  I  never  heard  of  it  nor  read  of  it  until  heard  I  of  it  from  you  this 
morning.  I  never  was  cognizant  of  the  fact. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Are  you  not  perfectly  aware  that  liquor-sellers 
have  been  frequently,  if  not  constantly,  on  the  juries  ? 

A.  Very  likely.  I  should  not  wonder,  if  in  selecting  my  juries,  I  got  men 
on  the  list  myself,  who  dealt  in  liquors. 

Q.    You  never  take  pains  to  exclude  them  ? 


132  APPENDIX. 

A.    No.     Why  should  I? 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  You  mean  that  you  do  not  intend  to  include  or 
exclude  a  man  for  that  reason  ? 

A.     Certainly  not.     The  line  has  never  been  drawn. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  admit  that  they  have  never  been  excluded 
for  that? 

A .  I  am  not  aware  that  the  question  ever  came  up.  I  never  heard  the 
question  mooted  anywhere  in  the -city  government,  as  to  whether  the  city 
government  selected  those  who  were  liquor-sellers,  or  those  who  were  not. 

Q.     The  great  difficulty,  you  know,  is  that  the  juries  could  not  agree  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  state  that  you  do  not  exclude  a  man  because  he  is  a  liquor-seller. 
Now,  I  want  to  know  if  a  man  who  has  an  interest  of  twenty  thousand  dollars 
as  profits  from  the  sale,  is  a  proper  man  to  sit  on  a  jury  ?  Is  not  his  interest 
too  great  ? 

A.    If  he  is  an  honest  man 

Q.     Is  an  honest  man  the  right  man  to  sit  on  his  own  case  ? 

A.  You  have  got  to  exclude  all  men  from  all  juries,  if  you  are  going  to 
exclude  a  man  who  has  not  got  some  interest. 

Q.     Is  not  the  interest  altogether  too  great  ? 

A.  That  is  a  sort  of  thing  that  you  cannot  tell  where  to  draw  the  line 
always,  for  some  men  may  be  influenced  by  a  small  consideration,  and  others 
would  not  be  for  a  large  one.  You  can  never  execute  any  laws,  nor  any 
government,  unless  you  have  honest  men. 

Q.     Do  you  get  honest  men  on  all  juries  ? 

A .     No,  sir ;  but  I  think  we  ought  to  try  to. 

Q.  I  would  ask  whether,  in  your  opinion,  a  man  who  has  an  interest  of 
twenty  thousand  dollars  against  conviction  is  a  suitable  man  to  try  a  case  ? 

A.  1  do  not  say  that ;  I  said  that  it  was  important  for  a  man  to  be  an 
honest  man  in  trying  some  of  these  cases. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Would  you  exclude  a  liquor-seller  from  the  jury,  if 
you  knew  him  to  be  a  liquor-seller  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  I  should ;  I  do  not  know  any  reason  why  I  should. 

Q.  Why,  then,  if  the  Board  of  Aldermen  at  any  time  have  selected  liquor- 
sellers,  knowing  them  to  be  such,  do  you  say  that  it  is  a  slander  ? 

A.  Because  it  is  assuming  that  they  could  have  selected  any  particular 
class  of  men. 

Q.  Does  not  the  law  require  that  jurors  shall  be  men  of  good  moral 
character,  and  free  from  legal  exceptions  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Is  a  man  who  is  made  a  criminal  by  law,  free  from  legal  exceptions  ? 

A.  That  is  a  very  difficult  question  to  answer.  There  is  a  law  that  nobody 
on  the  Sabbath,  shall  do  anything  but  acts  of  mercy  or  charity ;  but  what 
person  is  there  who  is  not  guilty  of  violating  it  every  Sunday  of  his  life  ? 
Why  should  not  he  be  excluded,  on  that  principle  ? 

Q.    Do  you  regard  that  as  a  fair  analogy  ? 

A .     I  do,  sir ;  he  violates  the  law. 

Q.  I  understand  you  that  so  far  as  exceptionableness  under  the  law  is 
concerned,  a  man  who  picks  up  chips  on  Sunday,  or  does  some  such  act,  is 


APPENDIX.  183 

equally  exceptionable  in  the  eye  of  the  law,  with  the  man  who  is  engaged  in 
a  criminal  traffic,  for  which  you  have  arraigned  his  fellow  trafficker:  you 
intimate  that  putting  a  liquor-seller  on  the  jury,  is  no  more  a  violation  of  the 
principle  ? 

A.  I  think  there  is  a  great  difference  in  the  public  estimation.  This  law 
of  which  I  speak  is  not  carried  out,  because  it  is  not  sustained  in  the  public 
mind. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  public  mind  dp.es  not  sanction  the  analogy 
which  you  run  ? 

A.  It  does  not  sanction  the  carrying  out  of  the  Sunday  law,  nor  the  liquor 
law. 

Q.  Why  do  you  say  it  is  a  slander  to  say  that  liquor-sellers  were  selected 
to  serve  on  a  jury? 

A.  Because,  I  think  that  to  select  jurors  to  carry  out  any  particular  end 
is  wrong. 

Q.  Do  you  say  that  you .  would  not  hesitate  to  select  a  liquor-seller,  and 
put  his  name  in  the  jury  box  ? 

A.  I  would  not.  I  never  asked  the  question  whether  a  man  was  a  liquor- 
seller  or  not. 

Q.     Would  you  put  a  gamester  in  ? 

A.    No. 

Q.    Would  you  put  a  counterfeiter  in  ? 

A.     No. 

Q.     Why  exclude  them  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  it  necessary  to  answer. 

Q.    Do  you  regard  liquor-sellers  as  reputable  men  ? 

A.    I  do,  some  of  them. 

Q.     As  a  class,  do  you  regard  them  as  reputable  men  ? 

A.  Perhaps  there  is  a  greater  portion  of  disreputable  men  engaged  in 
that  business. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  names  being  put  into  the  jury-box  so  as  to  make  the 
majority  consist  of  liquor-sellers  ? 

A.    I  answer  as  before  ;  I  never  heard  the  question  raised. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  I  understand  your  position  to  be  this :  that  you 
put  on  a  man  whom  you  consider  a  suitable  one,  and  that  you  do  not  consider 
the  fact  of  his  selling  liquor  as  disqualifying  him  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  do  not  understand  that  we  charged  you  with  putting  them  on 
because  they  were  liquor-sellers  ? 

A.  No.  I  understood  Mr.  Miner  to  charge  that  in  some  former  time  it 
had  been  so. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  I  wish  to  ask  a  question  having  a  bearing  on 
this  one  of  the  jury.  Suppose  there  were  two  men  complained  of  for  a  viola- 
tion of  the  Sunday  law,  and  their  cases  were  pending  at  the  same  court,  and 
they  were  both  of  them  upon  juries.  The  first  man's  case  comes  on  for  trial. 
Would  you  think  the  other  man,  who  is  also  complained  of,  and  whose  case  is 
then  pending  in  court,  would  be  a  suitable  juror  to  try  that  case,  he  having  a 
case  exactly  like  it  ? 


134  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  do  not  think  he  would  be  so  unprejudiced  as  if  he  were  not  so 
situated. 

Q.  Would  you  say  that  the  man  who  stands  complained  of  for  a  violation 
of  the  Sunday  law  would  be  a  suitable  juror  to  try  the  other  citizen  charged 
with  the  same  offence  ? 

A.    1  think  he  would  be  prejudiced. 

Q.     Would  you  not  remove  him  ? 

A.     I  think  the  attorney  would  ^challenge  him. 

Q.     That  is,  if  we  had  a  law  authorizing  it  ? 

A.     I  think  we  have  a  law  authorizing  it  now. 

TESTIMONY  OF  MAYOR  GEORGE  LEWIS. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)    You  are  Mayor  of  Roxbury  ? 

A.     Iain,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  Mayor  ? 

A.     Four  years  and  two  months. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  connected  with  the  city  government  of 
Roxbury  ? 

A.     Nine  years. 

Q.  I  would  inquire  of  you  your  observation  as  to  the  fact  whether  the 
present  prohibitory  law  has  been  or  can  be  enforced  to  any  good  purpose  ? 

A.     I  think  it  has  not  been,  sir. 

Q.     What  has  been  the  reason  ? 

A.  I  should  think,  sir,  from  the  indisposition  of  our  people  to  have  it 
executed. 

Q.  That  indisposition  is  great  enough  to  obstruct  the  execution  of 
the  law  ? 

A.  I  think  there  is  a  general  lukewarmness  in  regard  to  the  general 
execution  of  the  law. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  in  regard  to  the  future,  judging  from  the  past,  as 
to  the  operation  of  this  law  ? 

A.  I  hardly  think  that  the  law  in  the  future  will  meet  the  favorable 
consideration  of  our  people,  any  more  than  it  has  in  the  past. 

Q.     Could  there  be  any  other  system  of  legislation  that  could  check  it  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  any  opinion,  comparatively,  as  between  a  license  law  and  a 
prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  It  has  seemed  to  me,  that,  so  far  as  our  own  municipality  is  concerned, 
the  prohibitory  law  having  failed,  it  would  be  expedient  to  try  a  strict  license 
system,  and  see  how  that  would  work. 

Q.  Has  the  present  law  had  any  effect  in  checking  the  progress  of  intem- 
perance ? 

A.  I  think  it  has  not,  sir.  My  own  means  of  experience  and  knowledge 
in  this  matter  are  limited.  I  have  no  such  report  made  to  me  as  is  made  to 
the  mayor  of  Boston,  daily  or  weekly.  The  only  reference  that  I  have  is 
either  the  annual  report  of  the  City  Marshal,  or  the  records  of  the  Police 
Court. 

Q.    What  do  they  show  as  to  the  progress  of  intemperance  ? 


APPENDIX.  135 

A.     I  do  not  know,  sir. 

Q.     Is  intemperance  on  the  increase  ? 

A.     I  think  it  is  not,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  say  you  think  the  law,  within  your  expe- 
rience, has  not  done  anything  to  suppress  the  traffic  ? 

A.     I  have  no  acquaintance  with  that  fact. 

Q.     Are  you  acquainted  with  its  operation  in  the  various  country  towns  ? 

.4.     Not  at  all,  sir. 

Q.    Your  experience  is  confined — 

A.     To  Roxbury -alone. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Have  you  noticed  the  result,  either  by  statistics  or 
otherwise,  of  the  action  of  the  State  Constables  either  in  the  city  or  county  ? 

A.    I  have  not,  sir.     I  have  read  the  report  rather  carelessly. 

Q.  Have  you  in  your  connection  with  the  city  government  been  able  to 
execute  the  law,  while  it  was  unexecuted  in  Boston  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  nor  anywhere  else.  As  I  said  before,  the  law  is  not  in  favor 
with  our  people,  and  therefore  it  is  not  desired  to  have  it  enforced. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  if  the  law  had  been  enforced  in  Boston,  you 
could  have  done  nothing  in  Roxbury  ? 

A.     Oh,  not  exactly  nothing,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  would  be  desirable  to  suppress  the  traffic  with  such  a 
law  as  we  have  ? 

A.    Yes. 

Q.    You  would  like  to  see  that  ? 

A .    I  would  like  to  see  the  morals  of  the  community  improved. 

Q.  You  think  it  would  improve  the  morals  of  the  community  if  the 
law  were  enforced  ? 

A.    Yes. 

Q.  You  do  not  fear  the  furtive  influence  which  we  have  heard  of  so  many 
times  ? 

A.  So  far  as  we  are  concerned,  I  fear  no  influence  which  is  in  the  right 
direction. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Is  not  the  operation  of  the  constabulary  law 
popular  in  your  city  ? 

A.    We  do  not  think  anything  of  it  at  all. 

Q.     Have  you  had  it  out  there  ? 

^4.  Yes,  sir;  there  were  four  or  five  of  them  out  there  last  Saturday. 
JThey  searched  three  or  four  places,  and  I  see  that,  according  to  the  news- 
paper account,  they  succeeded  in  seizing  some  seventeen  gallons  of  liquor  in 
a  low  place. 

Q.    Do  you  know  anything  to  the  contrary  ? 

A.    I  know  nothing  of  it,  except  what  I  saw  in  the  newspapers. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  think  it  objectionable  that  they  should 
seize  liquors  from  low  places  ? 

A.    I  do  not  like  the  system  any  way;  I  think  it  is  demoralizing. 

Q.  What  is  the  harm  in  seizing  the  liquors  from  low  places,  if  they  are 
such  places  as  you  would  not  wish  ? 


136  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  am  not  prepared  to  argue  the  case.  I  have  given  the  subject  a 
general  consideration.  My  opinions  are  crude,  and  I  should  not  desire  to 
argue  it. 

Q.     And  you  would  not  be  willing  to  give  any  expression  on  the  subject  ? 

A.  My  expressions  are  so  crude,  that  those  who  are  acquainted  with  it 
might  find  me  in  error. 

Q.  Have  you,  since  the  statute  was  in  force,  made  efforts,  from  time  to 
time,  to  punish  common  sellers  in  Norfolk  County  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Has  there  been  any  difficulty  in  securing  convictions  ? 

A.     That  I  can  only  give  you  second-hand ;  not  from  my  knowledge. 

Q.     What  is  your  general  impression  ? 

A.  My  impression  is,  that  there  has,  sir.  My  City  Marshal  spoke  to  me 
a  year  or  two  ago  about  it,  and  said  it  was  impossible  to  obtain  convictions 
It  is  a  matter  with  which  I  have  had  no  connection  at  all. 

Q.     Does  the  mayor  in  your  city  give  orders  to  the  police  ? 

A.  Not  to  the  extent  that  is  done  in  the  city  of  Boston.  He  does  to  a  cer- 
tain extent. 

Q.  As  to  the  question  whether  such  a  law  shall  be  enforced,  does  it  rest 
upon  the  mayor  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Who  is  the  responsible  person  in  directing  your  police  V 

A .     The  board  of  Mayor  and  Aldermen. 

Q.  Have  the  Mayor  and  Board  of  Aldermen  ever  taken  final  action  on 
that  subject  ? 

A .    No,  sir. 

Q.    Never,  since  the  law  was  enacted  ? 

A.    No. 

Q.     Of  course  the  police  have  had  no  orders  on  that  subject  ? 

A.    No  special  orders. 

Q.  Have  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen  ever  been  disappointed  in  regard  to 
the  efforts  of  the  police  in  regard  to  the  law  ? 

A.    I  have  never  heard  any  expression  in  regard  to  it. 

Q.  Then  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen  have  never  exactly  supposed  that  the 
police  had  orders  to  execute  that  law  ? 

A.    They  have  orders  to  execute  all  the  laws  of  the  Commonwealth. 

Q.     Have  you  reason  to  expect  that  they  do  execute  that  law  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.  Have  those  laws  been  enforced  by  your  police  as  generally  as  other 
criminal  laws  ? 

A.     I  think  they  have. 

Q.     And  as  successfully  for  ought  you  know  ? 

A.     I  am  unable  to  say  that  relatively. 

Q.    Do  you  know  anything  to  the  contrary  ? 

A.    I  do  not. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  •  Has  the  enforcement  of  the  law,  during  the  last  two 
or  three  years  in  Roxbury,  in  the  seizure  of  liquors  and  prosecution  of  the 


APPENDIX.  137 

open  places,  had  any  effect;  and,  if  so,  what  is  the  fact  as  to  opportunities  for 
getting  it  in  other  places  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  I  do  not  know  that  there  is  an  open  bar  in  Roxbury; 
and  I  do  not  know  but  there  are  a  hundred.  The  police  say  that  they  do 
not  know  of  an  open  bar  in  Roxbury.  But  a  short  time  since,  my  City 
Marshal  told  me  that  he  thought  there  was  more  hidden ;  and  that  they  got  it 
by  going  into  back  rooms  of  houses ;  and  that  the  people  stayed  there  and 
drank  longer  than  they  would  otherwise. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  don't  know  whether  there  is  an  open  bar  ? 

A .     I  do  not. 

Q.  You  are  aware  that  in  the  city  of  Roxbury  this  great  evil  exists,  and 
you  take  so  little  interest  in  it  ? 

A.  I  deny  the  last  position,  that  I  take  very  little  interest  in  it.  But  my 
police  are  the  parties  in  this  matter ;  and  if  they  do  not  do  their  duty,  they 
have  to  account  for  it.  As  I  said  in  the  first  place,  they  have  been  instructed 
to  enforce  it.  By  repeated  failures,  I  think  the  matter  has  grown,  not  into 
disfavor,  but  they  feel  that  they  cannot  succeed. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  But  on  information  you  say  that  there  is  no  open 
bar  in  Roxbury  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  has  that  state  of  things  existed  ? 

A.     I  cannot  say,  sir. 

Q.  Has  it  arisen  from  the  action  of  your  police,  or  from  the  State  Con- 
stables ? 

A.  I  think  through  both  causes.  I  think  our  police  did  much  in  that  direc- 
tion before  the  State  Constables  took  hold  of  it. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  have  such  a  state  of  things  before,  within  your 
knowledge  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say,  sir.  I  should  not  wish  to  answer  a  question  that  I  do  not 
know. 

Q.  Have  you  any  reason  to  think  that  there  was  such  a  state  of  things  in 
Roxbury  before  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     When? 

A.  I  cannot  say.  Many  years  ago,  when  there  was  a  vigorous  prosecution 
of  liquor-sellers.  My  impression  is  to  that  effect. 

Q.     But  you  do  not  now  affirm  it  ? 

A.  No;  I  would  not  affirm  much  of  anything  that  I  have  said.  Our  city 
is  very  quiet.  *  We  have  few  arrests  for  drunkenness.  Our  custom  is,  if  a 
man  is  able  to  walk,  to  send  him  home.  It  is  only  when  they  are  in  the  habit 
of  getting  intemperate  and  being  in  the  street  that  we  arrest  them.  We  gen- 
erally try  to  get  them  home  and  out  of  the  way. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  think  that  the  police  and  State  Constables 
have  operated  to  suppress  the  open  sale  ? 

A.    I  think  so. 

18 


138  APPENDIX. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  CHARLES  THEODORE  RUSSELL. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.     In  Cambridge. 

Q.  •  Have  you  been  at  any  time  connected  with  the  city  government  ? 

A.  I  was  mayor  in  a  part  of  the  year  1861,  and  the  whole  of  the 
year  1862. 

Q.  Has  your  attention  in  your  official  relations  been  called  to  this  prohib- 
itory law,  its  execution,  and  its  influence  ? 

Q.  Yes,  sir ;  in  connection  with  the  execution  of  the  other  general  laws  of 
the  Commonwealth  and  ordinances  of  the  city.  I  ought  to  say,  perhaps,  that 
it  was  less  called  to  it  than  it  would  have  been  when  we  were  less  actively 
engaged  in  war  matters.  For  a  large  portion  of  the  time  we  were  engaged 
in  recruiting,  while  I  was  mayor,  and  we  gave  less  attention  to  it  than  we 
otherwise  should. 

Q-     What  opinion  have  you  formed  in  regard  to  the  law  ? 

A.  My  impressions  are  general.  My  impression  at  that  time  was  that  it 
was  a  very  difficult  law  to  enforce.  And  you  will  allow  me  to  state  what  I 
mean  by  enforcing.  I  do  not  mean  merely  the  complaint  against  an  individual 
and  the  conviction  of  that  individual  before  a  jury,  or  of  several  individuals ; 
but  the  enforcement  of  the  law  in  its  great  purpose  of  restraining  the  sale  of 
intoxicating  drinks  as  a  beverage.  I  am  not  very  familiar  with  the  operation 
of  the  law  specifically,  as  to  conviction,  or  the  disposition  of  juries  to  con- 
vict. But  as  we  speak  of  the  general  enforcement  of  law  ;  that  is,  in  accom- 
plishing its  end,  it  seems  to  me  that  we  have  not  accomplished  by  it  all  that 
its  friends  hoped,  and  all  that  its  friends  thought  desirable. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  as  to  whether  it  can  be  enforced,  so  as  to  accom- 
plish any  great  or  perceptible  diminution  of  the  sale  and  Avrongful  use  of 
intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.  I  should  doubt  whether  it  could,  taking  enforcement  to  be  what  I  state 
it  to  be.  I  do  not  doubt  but  that  you  may  get  complaints  and  convictions, 
but  I  mean  convictions  such  that  the  people  will  consider  them  as  they  do 
convictions  for  other  crimes  and  misdemeanors.  I  would  state,  however,  that 
I  have  had  no  experience  in  the  administration  of  the  city  government  under 
the  present  system  in  the  Commonwealth  of  the  State  Constabulary. 

Q.  What  has  been  your  observation  as  to  the  effect  of  the  convictions  as 
remedying  the  evil  ? 

A.     I  should  think  they  had  not,  hitherto. 

Q.  Have  you  any  opinion  as  to  the  relative  efficiency,  in  tie  end,  to  which 
allusion  has  been  made,  as  to  this  prohibitory  system  and  any  other  system  ? 

A.  I  have  a  general  idea  that  a  system  of  regulation  could  be  better 
enforced  than  a  system  of  prohibition.  If  you  will  allow  me  to  state  what  I 
mean  by  a  system  of  regulation,  my  impression  would  be  this :  to  leave  the 
prohibitory  law  substantially  or  entirely  as  it  is  now,  but  engraft  on  that  a 
provision  giving  the  power  to  the  mayor  and  aldermen  of  cities,  the  select- 
men of  towns,  or  the  county  commissioners,  (or  whatever  authority  the  legis- 
lature might  see  fit  to  designate,)  to  grant  licenses  within  certain  specific 
rules.  I  would  not  have  open  bars  anywhere.  I  speak  of  licensing  the  retail 
trade  to  a  certain  extent,  to  be  judged  of  by  a  proper  tribunal,  and  of 


APPENDIX.  139 

licensing  hotels  to  give  to  people  within  their  houses  ;  and  I  would  leave  the 
liquor  law  in  its  efficiency  just  as  it  is  now,  with  all  the  examples  and 
decisions  accumulated  upon  it,  so  as  not  to  have  to  settle  them  again.  I 
would  leave  that  to  its  efficiency ;  and  my  idea  is  that  greater  ease  in  the 
enforcement  would  grow  out  of  this  ;  and  I  think  that  you  would  then  sepa- 
rate from  the  illicit  traffic  a  considerable  portion  of  the  traffic  which  the 
majority  of  the  people  do  not  consider  as  wrong.  They  consider  that  the  sell- 
ing of  a  glass  of  liquor  is  not  a  crime.  That  feeling  in  the  community  would 
be  met  by  a  license  law.  Then,  in  regard  to  low  places,  and  places  of  dissi- 
pation and  vice,  there  would  be  a  general  consent.  There  would  be,  perhaps, 
this  thing  to  be  considered  on  the  other  side,  and  that  is  whether  these  low 
places  would  not  be  enlisted  against  the  then  existing  system.  I  think,  prob- 
ably, they  would  to  some  extent.  But  I  think  that  there  would  be  a  compro- 
mise between  the  different  parts  of  the  community,  and  that  they  would  sus- 
tain the  law,  with  the  convictions  of  the  great  community  behind  them. 

Q.  Uniting  the  two  systems  would  be  an  improvement,  in  your  opinion,  on 
anything  we  have  had  ? 

A.  That  would  be  my  impression.  I  have  not  debated  it  as  I  should  if  I 
were  a  legislator  or  going  to  act  officially  upon  the  matter. 

Q.     Have  you  a  town  agent  under  the  present  law  ? 

A.  I  think  one  was  appointed  under  my  administration,  but  I  am  not  cer- 
tain that  the  party  accepted.  I  am  not  quite  certain  whether  they  have  one 
now.  I  think  the  agency,  practically,  amounted  to  very  little,  if  there  was 
one.  My  idea,  compressed  in  few  words,  would  be,  an  extension  of  the 
license  system  under  the  present  law.  I  understand  that  the  present  laws 
license  for  some  purposes.  I  would  extend  that  license. 

Q.  For  the  ordinary  purposes  for  which  liquors  are  bought,  where  do  they 
supply  themselves  in  Cambridge  ? 

A.  I  should  think  it  was  more  largely,  perhaps,  from  the  city  of  Boston 
than  elsewhere.  But  there  are,  I  am  afraid,  too  many  places  in  Cambridge 
where  they  can  supply  themselves  if  they  desire. 

Q,  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Have  you  any  opinion  as  to  the  number  of  places 
it  would  be  expedient  to  license  in  the  city  of  Boston  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  have  not  knowledge  sufficient  to  determine  as  to  that.  It 
would  be  a  question  of  great  responsibility,  and  some  difficulty. 

Q.    Would  you  have  an  open  bar  anywhere  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  I  judged  from  your  answers  that  the  number  of  places  would  be  very 
limited,  according  to  your  idea  ? 

A.  My  impression  is  that,  in  making  prosecutions,  (I  do  not  speak  of  the 
State  Constables,)  the  officers  pass  over  the  great  houses  and  come  down  upon 
the  smaller  ones.  If  that  is  the  fact,  I  would  take  that  practical  judgment 
and  make  it  law. 

Q.  Then  you  would  leave  the  Tremont  House,  and  the  Parker  House,  and 
the  Revere  House  to  sell  ? 

A.  Yes;  to  sell  within  their  own  limits.  I  would  not  allow  the  Parker 
House  to  keep  an  open  bar  any  more  than  anybody  else. 


140  APPENDIX. 

Q.  When  the  constabulary  force  has  four  times  as  much  to  do  as  it  can 
do,  would  it  not  he  the  proper  course  to  touch  where  they  can  do  the  most 
good? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Is  that  a  sufficient  excuse  for  commencing  there  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  it  does  not  require  any  excuse,  in  my  mind. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  I  would  like  to  ask  if  the  convictions  obtained  in 
Middlesex  County  do  not  suppress  the  traffic,  why  you  would  rely  on 
convictions  under  a  license  law  ? 

A.  There  would  be,  to  some  extent,  the  same  difficulty.  I  intended  to 
separate  the  respectable  trade  from  the  disreputable  trade,  and  I  would 
bring  the  whole  force  of  the  temperance  community,  and  the  whole  force  of 
the  respectable  trade,  to  bear  against  that  which  is  disreputable.  To  that 
extent  I  think  we  should  gain,  not  so  much  in  the  conviction,  as  from  the 
general  effect. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that,  if  you  restrict  the  sale  from  ninety-nine  men  in  a 
hundred,  you  have  not  the  right  to  restrict  the  hundredth  ? 

A.  I  should  put  that  precisely  on  the  same  ground  that  we  do  in  electing 
a  town  clerk.  One  man  has  a  right  as  much  as  another,  but  the  necessity  of 
the  case  only  requires  one  man  for  the  office. 

Q.     Would  you  allow  one  man  to  sell  to  all  classes  through  the  town  ? 

A .  No,  sir.  I  would  have  the  license  revokable  at  the  pleasure  of  the 
granting  body.  I  do  not  know  that  I  would  set  a  very  high  price  upon  a 
license :  I  would  have  it  revokable  on  the  instant  when  a  man  is  found  selling 
to  minors,  drunkards,  or  others  to  whom  he  was  not  authorized  to  sell. 

Q.    Would  you  allow  him  to  sell  freely  to  everybody  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  would  not  interfere  to  protect  a  man  so  long  as  he  could 
protect  himself.  I  would  rely  more  upon  internal  than  external  influences,  to 
restrain  men. 

Q.  Then  you  would  not  rely  upon  the  restrictive  power  of  any  law  to 
suppress  drunkenness  ? 

A.    No. 

Q.     Then  why  speak  of  a  stringent  license  law  ? 

A.  I  mean  stringency  in  respect  to  the  general  provisions  ;  such  as  that  it 
should  not  be  sold  to  a  man  who  has  become  a  drunkard. 

Q.  Then  this  license  law  is  a  law  for  carrying  on  moderate  drinking  till 
drunkenness  is  reached  ? 

A .  That  is  not  my  interpretation  of  it.  I  think  the  moderate  drinking 
will  go  on,  and  I  should  rather  try  to  regulate  and  control  it,  than  to  undertake 
to  prohibit  it  and  have  it  out  of  my  control. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  the  moderate  use  of  liquors  to  be  a  good  to  any  class 
of  persons  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     Why  would  you  not  allow  minors  to  drink  ? 

A.     Because  they  are  less  able  to  protect  themselves. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  are  aware  that  the  moral  convictions  of 
what  are  termed  the  temperance  people,  are  against  licensing,  and  that  they 
believe  it  to  be  morally  wrong  to  license  ? 


APPENDIX.  141 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  I  know  that  is  so. 

Q.  Supposing  you  license  a  few  in  Boston,  would  you  not  necessarily  array 
the  convictions  of  the  temperance  people  against  that,  and  also  all  those  who 
do  not  get  a  license  ? 

A.  I  should  not  expect  to  array  the  convictions  of  the  temperance  men 
against  it.  I  should  suppose  they  would  try  to  make  it  as  effective  as  possible. 
I  should  expect  some  opposition  from  those  who  did  not  get  licenses. 

Q.    Would  not  that  be  very  much '? 

A .  It  would  depend  upon  the  demand  there  was  for  the  liquor.  The  argu- 
ment would  be  met  by  this  proposition :  We  do  not  license  you  to  sell  rum, 
because  we  do  not  wish  to  license  but  five  places  (if  that  is  the  number)  ;  you 
may  be  just  as  proper  a  person  as  any,  but  we  must  have  but  five,  and  we 
must  select  as  we  do  in  all  the  other  offices.  That  is  the  answer  to  the 
monopoly  part  of  the  argument.  But  as  to  the  moral  part  of  it,  so  far  as 
licensing  an  evil  is  concerned,  it  does  not  strike  me,  as  a  necessary  deduction 
that  they  would  resist  the  law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Yoir  would  not  license  the  sale  at  all,  as  a  bever- 
age, with  reference  to  the  public  good  ?  You  concede  it  all  to  be  evil,  but 
hope  to  restrain  the  evil  more  in  that  way  than  by  the  present  law  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  I  should  put  it  in  precisely  that  form. 

Q.  But  we  have  had  much  testimony  that  the  moderate  use  is  good,  and 
that  it  is  a  trespass  upon  one's  rights  to  prohibit  it  ? 

A.  That  feeling,  which  I  think  is  honest  with  a  great  many  persons,  is 
one  that  I  should  respect,  in  the  proposal  that  I  make  for  a  license  law ;  and  it 
is  with  the  hope  of  bringing  that  class  of  people  and  the  temperance  people 
together,  that  I  should  look  forward  to  an  increased  effect  of  the  law. 

Q.    But  you  do  not  think  it  is  necessary  to  use  it  ? 

A.  No.  I  think  generally  it  would  be  better  if  people  would  abstain 
entirely. 

Adjourned. 


142  APPENDIX. 


SIXTH    DAY. 

THURSDAY,  February  28tli,  1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  A.-M.  The  testimony  in  behalf  of  the 
petitioners,  was  resumed. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  GEORGE  C.  RICHARDSON. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.    In  Boston. 

Q.     Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 

A.     Devonshire  Street ;  I  am  a  commission  merchant. 

Q.     You  are  the  head  of  the  firm  of  Geo.  C  Richardson  &  Co.  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Were  you  at  any  time  connected  with  the  municipal  government  of 
the  city  of  Cambridge  ? 

A.     In  1803,  I  was  Mayor  of  Cambridge. 

Q.  Be  good  enough  to  inform  the  Committee  of  the  result  of  your  owu 
observation,  oilicially  and  otherwise,  as  to  the  practicability  of  restraining 
intemperance  through  the  instrumentality  of  the  present  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.     To  be  understood  fully,  I  should  have  to  refer  to  my  early  experience. 

Q.     Explain  in  your  own  way. 

A.  I  have  been  a  resident  of  Boston,  and  a  business  man,  for  about  thirty 
years  past.  Before  I  came  to  Boston  (being  educated  in  the  north  part  of 
Worcester  County,)  we  organized  temperance  movements,  and  felt  that  we 
were  in  a  way  really,  in  the  end,  to  stop  the  sale,  or,  in  other  words,  the  use 
of  ardent  spirits.  So  far  as  my  own  observation  went,  of  some  five  years,  in 
the  early  excitement  and  controversy  upon  the  temperance  question,  we 
appeared  to  be  rather  successful ;  but  in  the  latter  part  of  the  time,  what  we 
call  rum  stores  began  to  spring  up  about  us,  and  the  effect  was  very  unfavor- 
able to  the  cause  of  what  we  term  true  temperance  habits  of  life.  About 
that  time  I  came  to  Boston,  and  have  been  engaged  in  business  here  from 
that  time  to  this,  but  have  always  taken  an  interest  in  the  temperance  move- 
ments, and  although  from  the  time  that  I  have  been  a  resident  of  Boston  I 
have  not  actively  participated  with  what  are  tenned  temperance  men,  I  have 
always  felt  myself  as  good  a  friend  of  the  cause  as  any  other  man,  and  have 
always  contributed,  whenever  I  could  do  so,  to  aid  its  work.  My  own  obser- 
vation comes  to  this  point :  that  prohibition  is  absolutely  impossible,  taking 
men  and  things  as  they  are ;  that  there  is  no  way  of  reaching  the  question  so 
effectually  and  favorably  as  by  a  good  and  what  is  termed  a  stringent 
license  law.  My  experience  as  Mayor  of  Cambridge  confirmed  the  con- 
victions that  had  been  growing  upon  me  for  years  in  that  direction.  In 
the  course  of  my  official  duties,  finding  it  impossible,  by  the  reports  of  the 
police,  and  the  Chief  of  Police  in  particular,  to  restrain,  to  any  very  great 
extent,  the  sale  of  spirits  by  unlicensed  men  in  the  city  of  Cambridge,  we 


APPENDIX.  143 

had  a  general  meeting  upon  the  question.  Some  of  the  leading  temperance 
men  were  with  us,  and  we  meant  to  suppress  its  sale,  if  possible.  We  obtained 
all  the  evidence  we  were  capable  of  getting,  and  it  all  went  to  one  point.  The 
testimony  of  the  police  was  all  on  one  side — that  they  could  not  do  it ;  that 
in  the  cases  they  brought  before  the  Police  Court,  it  was  next  to  impossible  to 
convict ;  and  if  they  did  convict  in  Cambridge,  they  were  never  successful  at 
Lowell.  That  was  almost  the  universal  experience  in  hundreds  of  cases. 
The  county  charges  were  very  heavy  without  much  result,  and  with  very  little 
effect  favorable  to  the  cause.  That  was  the  general  result.  My  observation, 
generally,  tends  to  this  point :  that  all  efforts  heretofore  made  have  proved 
unavailing;  and  I  think  the  great  difficulty  commenced  in  the  enactment  of 
the  fifteen-gallon  law.  It  caused  organized  associations  to  be  formed  in  the 
Communities,  and  liquor  was  carried  in  and  divided,  and  paid  for  by  the 
clubs  or  associations,  or  whatever  you  may  call  them,  and  in  that  way,  instead 
of  a  decrease  there  was  a  very  great  increase.  The  police  of  Cambridge 
reported  to  me  that  there  were  nearly  two  hundred  families  in  Cambridge  that 
supplied  themselves  with  liquor  in  that  way.  They  generally  came  into  Bos- 
ton on  Saturdays  and  filled  up  their  jugs  or  kegs,  and  divided,  and  drank  it 
on  Sundays.  That  was  the  usual  practice  of  a  large  class,  and  I  believe  the 
citizens  of  Cambridge  will  rank  with  the  citizens  of  any  other  city  or  town 
in  the  Commonwealth,  and  the  statistics  will  show  that.  These  practical 
points  having  come  under  my  observation,  I  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that 
you  can  reach  the  question  in  no  way  except  by  a  stringent  license  law  to 
restrain  it  effectually.  All  other  restraint  is  only  apparent  and  nominal,  and 
the  increase  in  many  directions  has  been  very  great. 

Q.  Would  you  have  your  law  so  framed  as  that  towns,  if  they  pleased  not 
to  have  it,  should  have  the  power  to  exclude  it  or  to  license  it,  if  they  saw  fit  ? 

A.     I  should  think  that  would  be  advisable. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  What  was  the  obstacle  to  the  enforcement  of 
the  law  ? 

A .     The  want  of  ability  to  convict. 

Q.     Didn't  juries  agree  when  the  facts  were  proved  ? 

A.     The  difficulty  was  to  prove  the  facts  before  you  reached  the  jury. 

Q.  Was  it  not  perfectly  practicable  for  your  police  to  give  evidence  to 
convict  of  the  violation  of  the  law  ? 

A.    It  might  have  been  possible,  but  was  not  practicable. 

Q.  What  evidence  was  used  ?  Did  the  police  testify,  or  did  they  rely 
upon  the  customers  ? 

A.  Both.  They  sought,  in  various  directions  and  in  various  ways,  to 
obtain  conviction,  but  the  discipline  or  organization  of  the  parties  in  interest 
was  so  very  thorough  that  it  was  almost  impossible  to  reach  it. 

Q.     How  many  did  you  suppose  sold  in  Cambridge  ? 

A.  I  have  not  referred  to  my  statistics.  I  am  merely  speaking  from 
memory.  My  impression  is  that  the  police  reported  that  there  were  over  two 
hundred  places  where  liquor  could  be  had.  I  may  be  wrong  in  the  figures. 
I  cannot  be  positive. 

Q.    How  many  would  you  license  in  the  town  of  Cambridge  ? 


144  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  was  a  resident  of  Cambridge  over  twenty-five  years.  When  my 
residence  commenced  in  Cambridge  the  population  was  about  five  thousand. 
Then  there  were  quite  a  number  of  licensed  taverns  and  hotels. 

Q.     What  year  was  that  ? 

A .  It  was  in  the  early  part  of  1838  or  the  latter  part  of  the  autumn  of  1837, 
about  the  time  that  the  active  legislation  commenced  in  this  Commonwealth. 
At  that  time  there  were  quite  a  number  of  taverns  and  hotels,  and,  I  think,  as 
far  as  tested  by  these  taverns  and  hotels,  in  proportion  to  the  population, 
there  was  nothing  like  the  quantity  of  ardent  spirits  consumed  in  the  town  of 
Cambridge  that  there  is  at  the  present  time. 

Q.     That  was  under  the  "  fifteen-gallon  law  ?  " 

A.     About  the  time  of  that  law. 

Q.     Still,  how  many  would  you  license  in  Cambridge  ? 

A.  The  population  is  about  thirty  thousand.  Cambridge  is  divided  into 
four  or  five  sections.  I  should  think  there  should  be  a  party  licensed  in  each 
section  of  the  town.  I  would  do  nothing  that  should  increase  the  sale  of 
ardent  spirits.  My  action  would  be  to  diminish  it. 

Q.  I  should  like  the  numbers  as  near  as  you  feel  prepared  to  give  them. 
You  mean  to  say  one  in  each  of  the  three  sections  ? 

A.  Cambridge  is  divided  into  four  or  five  sections;  about  five  it  would 
require  in  Cambridge.  I  speak  without  going  into  an  analysis  fully,  of  course. 

Q.  Would  you  license  them  to  sell  on  the  premises  to  be  drank  on  the 
premises  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Would  you  license  wholesalers  ? 

A.  Not  to  sell  at  the  bar.  I  would  allow  it  to  be  used  in  the  house  as 
families  use  it  in  their  houses. 

Q.    Would  you  license  grocers  to  sell  to  families  ? 

A.     A  limited  number  of  grocers  would  probably  require  to  be  licensed. 

Q.  The  number  you  give  is  what  is  now  licensed  by  the  present  law.  You 
would  license  hotels  to  sell  to  their  guests,  to  be  drank  at  the  table  and  in  their 
rooms  ? 

A.    I  would,  most  certainly. 

Q.     You  would  license  grocers  to  sell  to  respectable  individuals  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  many  grocers  do  you  think  there  are  in  Cambridge  ? 

A.     I  could  not  tell. 

Q.     Some  thirty  or  forty  ? 

A.    You  can  judge  just  as  well  as  I  can  in  regard  to  that. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  any  reason  why  one  respectable  grocer  should  have 
the  monopoly  of  the  business  ? 

A.  I  understand  it  is  the  duty  of  all  laws  to  be  administered  for  the  good 
of  the  community,  and  it  is  perfectly  proper  and  consistent  that  those  who  are 
intrusted  with  their  charge  should  decide  that  point. 

Q.  Of  course  they  will  decide ;  but  in  your  judgment  would  it  be  just  and 
fair  to  license  one  grocer  where  there  are  forty,  and  give  him  a  monopoly  of 
the  business  ? 

A.    If  the  public  good  required  it. 


APPENDIX.  145 

Q.  Would  the  public  good  require  it  ?  Would  it  be  just  ?  The  question 
of  justice  comes  in. 

A.    Entirely  so,  in  my  judgment. 

Q.  I  suppose,  of  course,  that  the  way  you  expect  to  get  any  benefit  from 
a  license  law,  is  to  suppress  the  sale  by  the  unlicensed  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  say  there  are  about  two  hundred  in  Cambridge  that  sell,  and  you 
found  it  impossible  to  get  convictions,  or  very  difficult,  so  that  you  could  not 
succeed  in  your  object.  If  you  license  five  out  of  the  two  hundred  and 
attempt  to  suppress  the  sale  by  the  other  one  hundred  and  ninety-five,  will 
you  not  meet  the  same  obstacle  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  You  create  a  moral  sentiment  that  will  aid  you,  and  the  par- 
ties licensed  become  effective  means  of  aid,  and  all  the  influence  growing  out 
of  the  license  system  would  be  an  aid ;  instead  of  operating  against  you  they 
would  assist  you.  I  believe  the  public  sentiment  is  in  favor  of  regulation 
instead  of  prohibition. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  public  sentiment,  do  you  mean  to  say  the  majority 
of  the  people  ?  I  suppose  the  preponderance  of  opinion  in  a  community  is 
the  public  sentiment  ? 

A.  I  believe  the  preponderance  of  the  mind  of  the  community  that  acts 
upon  the  question,  is  in  favor  of  a  regulating  license  law. 

Q.  "  The  mind  that  acts  upon  the  question."  Is  that  the  people  who  have 
thought  little  of  temperance,  or  those  who  have  felt  a  great  interest  in  the 
cause,  and  have  been  very  active  in  it  ? 

A.  The  mind  that  acts  upon  it  in  the  end  always  prevails  upon  public 
questions.  Sometimes  it  takes  ten  years — sometimes  twenty  years. 

Q.  We  have  had  this  prohibitory  law  twenty  years;  it  has  been  a  matter 
in  politics  for  some  time  ;  efforts  have  constantly  been  made  to  repeal  it,  but 
have  not  succeeded  in  that  yet,  and  here  comes  a  legislature  with  a  majority 
against  it.  Is  not  that  evidence  that  the  public  sentiment  of  this  State  is  in 
favor  of  the  law  ? 

A.  Judging  from  the  facts  as  they  appear  to  me  from  day  to  day,  I  should 
think  that  there  is  a  very  strong  desire  in  the  community  to  suppress  the  sale 
of  ardent  spirits.  It  is  almost  universal :  but  an  effort  has  been  made  for 
fifteen  years,  and  even  more  than  that,  more  than  twenty  years,  and  the  com- 
munity are  coming  to  a  realizing  sense  of  the  fact  that  they  have  not  stopped 
the  sale  of  it,  and  they  believe  it  is  impossible  to  do  it. 

Q.  You  give  that  as  your  judgment.  Is  not  that  particularly  the  sentiment 
of  those  with  whom  you  come  most  in  contact — the  business  men  of  Boston  ? 
Do  you  know  how  it  is  in  the  country  ? 

A .  My  impression  is  that  the  country  is  now  strongly  impressed  with  the 
importance  of  the  suppression  of  the  sale  of  ardent  spirits.  They  have  not 
reached  the  question  yet,  how  they  shall  do  it.  The  country  can  do  it  much 
more  effectually  than  the  city.  Their  means  of  obtaining  information,  and 
of  obtaining  conviction  under  the  law,  are  altogether  more  favorable  than  in 
the  cities  on  the  sea-coast. 

Q.     What  is  the  town  in  Worcester  County  in  which  you  lived  ? 

A .     Royalston. 


146  APPENDIX.  . 

Q.    Have  you  been  in  the  habit  of  going  to  Royalston  frequently  ? 

A.     Not  very  often.     I  was  there  a  year  ago. 

Q.     Have  you  talked  with  the  people  there  on  this  subject  ? 

A.    Not  particularly. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  the  sale  is  restricted  to  any  great  extent  in 
Royalston  under  the  law  ? 

A.  The  action  of  the  law  now,  I  am  not  familiar  with,  but  I  know  the 
stopping  of  the  sale  in  what  was  calted  the  regular  stores,  the  old  regular 
traders  in  the  town,  worked  very  unfavorably  for  many  years.  It  caused 
other  stores  to  come  into  operation  which  sold  ardent  spirits,  and  it  was  very 
unfavorable  to  the  temperance  cause  for  many  years.  How  it  is  at  the 
present  time  I  am  unable  to  say. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  sentiment  of  the  people  who  have  lived  there  and 
observed  it— -whether  in  favor  of  prohibition  or  license  ? 

A.    I  do  not 

Q.  Don't  you  think  when  you  have  licensed  five,  the  sense  of  injustice 
will  be  very  strong  upon  the  one  hundred  and  ninety-five  who  are  not  licensed, 
but  who  have  heretofore  sold  ?  Would  they  not  regard  it  as  a  monopoly, 
and  as  very  unjust,  if  it  is  to  be  sold  at  all ;  that  is,  for  the  purposes  you  name, 
in  the  hotels  and  stores  for  families  ? 

A.     The  tendency  would  be  that  way. 

Q.    Would  it  not  be  an  obstacle  and  a  large  one  ? 

A.  Nothing  in  comparison  with  the  difficulties  we  labor  under  at  the 
present  time. 

Q.  You  think  it  would  be  much  easier  to  suppress  the  one  hundred  and 
ninety-five  than  the  two  hundred  ? 

A.     I  think  it  would. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Would  you  suppress  by  a  license  law,  or  any  law, 
the  traffic  in  liquors  to  be  used  as  beverages  if  you  could,  independent  of  the 
purposes  you  have  named  ? 

A.    I  would  suppress  the  improper  and  excessive  use  of  it. 

Q.  But  would  you  not  deem  what  is  called  the  moderate  use  of  alcoholic 
liquors  as  a  beverage  improper  ? 

A.  I  would  not  do  anything  that  would  not  allow  every  family  in  the 
Commonwealth  to  use  it  in  their  own  family,  but  I  would  create  a  moral 
sentiment  that  would  make  them  feel  responsible  for  its  right  use. 

Q.  Would  a  law  sanctioning  its  sale  as  a  beverage  create  a  moral  senti- 
ment against  its  use  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  In  connection  with  the  work  which  true  temperance  men  would  do,  it 
would. 

Q.    You  think  it  would  do  it  ? 

A.    I  think  a  license  law  would  be  an  aid. 

Q.  Just  tell  me  how  you  as  an  advocate  of  abstinence  would  feel  aided 
by  a  law  that  declared  that  the  public  good  demanded  the  sale  of  ardent 
spirits  ? 

A.  I  believe  it  is  demoralizing  to  a  community  to  the  greatest  extent  for 
the  legislature  to  enact  laws  that  the  public  know  cannot  be  enforced,  and 


APPENDIX.  117 

that  they  do  not  put  themselves  in  a  position  as  citizens  of  the  Commonwealth 
to  enforce. 

Q.  You  are  begging  the  question,  inasmuch  as  we  have  the  testimony  of 
an  expert  that  the  present  law  can  be  enforced  as  his  experience.  If  the 
object  is  to  suppress  the  use  as  a  beverage,  whether  you  would  feel  yourself 
aided  as  a  true  temperance  man  in  suppressing  the  use  of  alcoholic  liquors 
as  beverages,  by  a  law  which  provided  for  their  sale  as  demanded  by  the  public 
good? 

A .    I  have  answered  that. 

Q.    How? 

A.    I  told  you  I  thought  the  law  would  aid  you. 

Q.  How  would  a  law,  declaring  its  use  to  be  a  public  good,  aid  you  in  sup- 
pressing its  use  ? 

A.  If  the  law  regarded  it  to  be  a  public  good  that  men  should  use  it,  if 
they  chose  to  use  it  in  their  private  families  or  at  public  houses  of  enter- 
tainment  

Q.  It  would  aid  you  in  convincing  the  public  that  it  is  their  duty  to 
abstain  from  its  use  ? 

A.    I  don't  think  it  would  be  any  injury. 

Q.     Do  you  ask  for  a  license  law  in  the  interest  of  total  abstinence  ? 

A.    I  do  not  believe  in  total  abstinence. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  In  Utah,  polygamy  is  practised,  and  is  prevalent 
there.  Recently  they  have  petitioned  Congress~to  repeal  their  laws  against 
polygamy,  because  they  are  not  enforced  and  cannot  be  enforced,  and  are 
opposed  to  public  opinion.  I  would  like  your  judgment  whether  that  would  be 
expedient  because  they  chose  to  practise  polygamy  and  have  not  yet  been 
able  to  suppress  it  ? 

A.  I  will  appeal  to  the  Chairman  whether  that  question  is  connected  with 
the  temperance  question  in  Massachusetts.  Not  having  been  a  resident  of 
Utah,  I  am  not  capable  of  answering  the  question. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  Would  you,  as  a  general  rule  of  legislation, 
repeal  all  laws  which  could  not  be  universally,  absolutely  enforced  ? 
Would  you,  as  a  general  rule,  if  you  find  a  law  cannot  be  enforced,  repeal  it 
for  that  reason  ? 

A .  I  should  not  say  I  would  repeal  all  laws  that  could  not  be  absolutely 
enforced.  I  do  not  believe  in  absolutism.  We  must  approach  as  near  per- 
fection as  we  can. 

Q.     Strike  out  the  word  "  absolute  ?  " 

A.  I  would  repeal  a  law  when  it  had  been  proved  that  it  was  not  bene- 
ficial to  the  community. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  would  repeal  all  laws  in  every  democratic 
community,  which  the  public  opinion  does  not  sustain  ? 

A.  The  question  involves  all  legislation  connected  with  government  affairs. 
It  is  most  too  broad  for  me.  I  should  always  approximate  as  near  that  as  the 
public  good  in  my  judgment  would  allow,  taking  all  the  circumstances  of  the 
case  from  time  to  time  into  consideration. 


148  APPENDIX. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  lived  in  the  country  in  early  life,  during  the 
existence  of  license  laws.  Do  you  recollect  whether  the  license  law  ever  did 
anything  to  suppress  the  traffic  ? 

A.  In  my  judgment,  in  my  native  town,  it  was  the  most  effective  means  of 
suppressing  intemperance. 

Q.    What  years  ? 

A.    Previous  to  1835. 

Q.  Was  intemperance  suppressed  by  the  law  ?  Was  not  that  the  result  of  a 
moral  sentiment  ? 

A.  The  store  I  was  educated  in  sold  ardent  spirits;  the  store  opposite, 
also.  No  men  stood  higher  in  Worcester  County  than  the  gentlemen  at  the 
head  of  the  two  establishments.  In  1831  or  '32  we  stopped  the  sale  entirely. 
Upon  the  premises  in  which  I  was  educated,  there  was  never  anything  like 
intoxication.  No  man  presumed  to  buy  ardent  spirits  expecting  to  use  it  im- 
properly. When  we  left  off*  selling  it,  other  stores  in  the  community  rose  up, 
and  were  known  to  be  rum  stores,  and  manufactured  drunkards ;  —  that,  I 
know. 

Q.     Were  those  stores  that  sold  in  that  way  licensed  ? 

A.    They  were  licensed  at  that  time. 

Q.     Then  how  did  your  license  law  restrain  the  traffic  ? 

A.  The  establishments  that  were  in  existence  before  this  were  sufficient  to 
accommodate  the  community,  and  that  was  a  question  brought  up  distinctly 
at  a  public  meeting  upon  the  question,  and  they  said  it  was  an  interference 
with  the  rights  of  the  people.  It  was  said  we  were  dictating  to  the  people 
that  they  should  not  use  spirit,  and  the  farmers  became  stockholders  in  the 
store. 

Q.  The  store  you  said  you  were  in,  and  another  one  opposite,  gave  up  the 
business.  Why  ? 

A.  Because  we  felt  a  very  strong  interest  in  stopping  the  sale  entirely,  if 
possible.  We  felt  we  could  stop  the  sale,  and  were  defeated. 

Q.  You  gave  up  from  moral  considerations,  and  then  under  the  license 
law  they  went  and  licensed  worse  men  and  manufactured  drunkards.  I  don't 
see  how  that  makes  it  out  that  the  license  restrained  the  traffic. 

A.     The  proper  use  of  the  license. 

Q.  Licensed  people  gave  it  up,  and  then  they  went  and  licensed  disreput- 
able people  ? 

A.     There  is  a  proper  administration  of  law,  and  an  improper  one. 

Q.  In  this  case  they  licensed  improper  persons  under  the  license  law,  and 
drunkards  were  made  ? 

A.  I  am  not  prepared  to  say  that.  They  licensed  persons  who  sold — and 
we  refused  to  sell. 

Q.     The  license  law  did  not  cause  you  to  give  it  up  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  But  caused  others  less  respectable  to  sell  it,  and  the  consequences  were 
bad.  You  gave  it  up  from  moral  considerations,  and  worse  people  took  up 
the  traffic.  I  don't  see  how  that  makes  it  out  that  the  license  law  suppressed 
the  traffic  ?  Have  you  changed  your  views  on  the  subject  ? 


APPENDIX.  149 

A.  At  that  time  the  same  rules  would  not  work  that  would  work  at  the 
present  day,  after  thirty  years'  experience  under  the  legislation  of  the 
Commonwealth. 

Q.    I  understand  you  to  refer  to  that  period  in  favor  of  a  license  law  ? 

A.    In  regard  to  the  practical  element. 

Q.     You  speak  of  the  fifteen-gallon  law.     How  long  was  that  in  operation  ? 

A.    My  impression  is,  two  or  three  years. 

Q.    It  was  in  operation  eight  months  only,  I  believe  ? 

A.     Only  a  short  time. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MCCLELLAN.)  Were  there  others  who  sold  at  that  period 
besides  those  who  were  licensed  ? 

A.    I  could  not  answer  that. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  whether  persons  who  had  licenses  were  in  the  habit 
of  looking  out  that  no  others  sold  ? 

A.  The  licenses  were  merely  nominal:  only  a  small  compensation  being 
required ;  not  as  they  would  be  to-day. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  MINER.)    Just  how  would  you  make  a  license  law  stringent  ? 

A,  I  can  only  answer  that  question  by  saying  that,  so  far  as  I  was 
capable,  I  would  construct  one  that  could  be  enforced. 

Q.  You  only  say  the  same  thing  over,  in  other  words.  The  practical 
point  is,  how  can  you  make  a  license  law,  the  very  point  and  drift  of  which 
is  to  protect  men  in  selling  liquor ;  how  can  you  make  that  stringent,  so  as  to 
prevent  men  from  becoming  intoxicated  under  the  operation  of  that  law  ? 

A.    I  do  not  suppose  it  could  be  made  so  as  to  do  that. 

Q.     You  yield  that  point  ? 

A.    I  do  not  suppose  it  is  possible  to  do  that. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EX-MAYOR  FREDERIC  W.  LINCOLN,  JR. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  How  long  have  you  been  connected  with  the 
government  of  Boston  ? 

A.  My  first  term  of  service  was  in  1858-59-60.  My  second  term  was  in 
1863-4-5-6. 

Q.  Be  good  enough  to  give  your  impression,  as  it  came  under  your 
official  notice,  and  official  information  from  your  subordinates,  of  the  working 
of  the  present  law  in  regard  to  checking  the  excessive  use  of  intoxicating 
liquors  ? 

A.  My  impression  and  my  conviction  is  that  the  present  prohibitory  law> 
so  called,  cannot  be  enforced,  although  efforts  were  made  by  me  and  by  my 
subordinate  officers  in  that  direction. 

Q,  Have  you  any  information  as  to  the  excessive  use  of  liquor  ?  Take 
the  period  of  your  being  in  office,  or  the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years  ? 

Q.  My  impression  is,  that  it  has  increased  ;  that  the  sale  of  ardent  spirits 
and  the  number  of  drunkards  have  increased  faster  than  our  population  has 
increased. 

Q.  You  have  your  regular  reports  of  the  number  of  drunkards  taken  in  a 
state  of  intoxication.  How  great  a  proportion,  in  your  judgment,  of  those 
who  really  drink  to  excess  are  borne  on  those  reports  ?  Do  all  intoxicated 
persons  come  under  the  notice  of  the  police  ? 


150  APPENDIX. 

A.    I  suppose  those  are  correct. 

Q.  The  reports  are  correct,  but  do  the  police  see  and  know  every  man 
that  gets  drunk  in  Boston,  and  report  it  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  How  great  would  be  the  proportion  of  those  who  drink  to  excess  and 
are  occasionally  drunk  or  habitually  not  reported  by  the  police  ?  Have  you 
any  information  as  to  how  large  the  proportion  would  be  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  As  to  the  places  of  sale,  public  and  secret,  and  the  increase  of  them 
during  this  last  term  ? 

A.  I  should  think  they  had  increased.  That  is  a  fact  which  could  be 
testified  to  by  the  Chief  of  Police  better  than  by  me. 

Q.  From  your  own  observation  and  experience,  your  opinion  of  the 
efficacy  in  the  same  direction  of  checking  intoxication  by  a  proper  license 
law? 

A.  The  whole  subject  is  surrounded  with  difficulties.  My  conviction  is 
that  under  all  the  circumstances  in  this  community  that  a  license  law  would 
be  most  effectual. 

Q.  As  to  the  efforts  of  the  city  government  under  your  administration  to 
enforce  the  law.  Did  you  make  efforts  ? 

A .  Yes,  sir.  We  were  continually  making  efforts.  There  was  no  term 
in  the  court,  but  more  or  less  cases  were  put  before  the  grand  jury. 

Q.  Did  the  city  government  continue  that  until  they  were  asked  by  the 
authorities  of  the  courts  to  desist  ? 

A.  They  have  always  continued.  I  recollect  in  two  or  three  instances 
the  district-attorney  came  in  to  me  and  says,  "  Why  are  you  putting  so  many 
of  these  liquor  cases  before  the  court  ?  It  is  a  great  expense  to  the  country. 
We  can't  try  them."  '  I  told  him  I  could  not  help  that.  It  was  our  duty  to 
make  the  complaints.  When  it  goes  into  the  courts  it  is  for  the  grand  jury, 
district-attorneys  and  juries  to  convict.  We  have  nothing  to  do  with  that. 
We  must  do  our  duty  in  the  matter. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  What  efforts  were  made  under  your  administra- 
tion to  suppress  the  sale  ? 

A.     By  complaining  of  the  persons  who  sold. 

Q.     To  what  extent  did  they  complain  ? 

Q.     (By  Mr.  LINCOLN.)     You  mean  the  exact  number  ? 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Generally,  as  near  as  you  recollect.  How 
many  cases  were  brought  as  near  as  you  recollect  ?  They  have  been  reported 
from  year  to  year  ? 

A.  Those  reports  will  state  exactly  how  many  cases  were  reported.  For 
instance,  the  last  report  of  the  police  happened  to  be  here  yesterday,  and 
looking  it  over  I  found  last  year  forty-one  common  sellers. 

Q.     Forty-one  cases  reported  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     You  think  that  was  much  of  an  effort  to  suppress  it  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  The  difficulty  was  in  this  way.  We  would  lay  a  certain 
number  of  cases  before  the  grand  jury  and  then  they  were  carried  into  court, 
and  if  the  district-attorney  should  ascertain  that  the  jury  would  convict,  more 


APPENDIX.  151 

cases  would  be  put  in  ;  but  generally  a  number  were  put  upon  file  and  the 
district-attorney  would  not  find  the  jury  would  convict,  and  therefore  no 
efforts  were  made  in  that  term  of  the  court  to  get  other  convictions. 

Q.  One  great  trouble  was  the  failure  of  juries  to  convict.  That  applied 
to  common  sellers  particularly  ? 

A.     Also  under  the  Nuisance  Act. 

Q.  Have  you  known  cases  where  they  would  not  convict  under  tho 
Nuisance  Act  where  the  case  was  clearly  proved  ? 

A.     I  am  not  so  clearly  acquainted  with  the  details  as  I  never  went  into    i 
court.     My  impression  is  that  the  reason  the  grand  jury  after  a  case  was  laid 
before  them  would  find  a  bill  of  indictment  under  the  Nuisance  Act  was 
because  there  was  more  probability  of  a  conviction  under  that  Act  than 
otherwise. 

Q.  Did  you  not  understand  there  was  no  particular  difficulty  in  convicting 
under  the  Nuisance  Act  ? 

A.     I  don't  think  there  was  as  much  difficulty. 

Q.  The  reports  show  that  during  the  last  three  years  in  a  city  where  there 
were  about  two  thousand  sellers,  the  police  made  in  1864  two  hundred  and 
ninety-nine  complaints.  Should  you  suppose  that  the  presentation  of  two 
hundred  and  ninety-nine  cases  under  the  Nuisance  Act,  in  a  year  where  the 
fine  was  $50,  was  anything  that  could  be  called  an  effort  to  suppress  the  traffic  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  because,  if  there  could  have  been  convictions,  more  would 
have  been  presented. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  the  State  Constables  have  procured  the  con- 
viction of  something  between  two  and  three  thousand  men  in  two  years  ? 

A.    I  have  seen  that  statement  in  the  paper. 

Q.    Do  you  doubt  it  ? 

A.    I  have  no  reason  to  doubt  it. 

Q.     They  had  about  thirty  men,  and  the  police  had  three  or  four  hundred  ? 

A.     They  were  specially  detailed  for  that  duty. 

Q.     Could  not  the  police  of  Boston  be  specially  detailed  for  that  duty  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Did  you  not  regard  it  of  consequence  enough  to  suppress  the  traffic  ? 

A.  General  orders  were  given  to  the  police  to  do  what  they  could  under 
this  law  as  under  any  other  law.  I  think  a  large  portion  of  the  police  were 
desirous  of  executing  the  law.  I  believe  two-thirds  or  three-fourths  of  them 
are  temperance  men,  pledged  men. 

Q.     Then  the  police  obeyed  the  orders  of  their  superiors  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  If  they  could  make  out,  as  they  say,  a  case,  they  would  put 
it  in. 

Q.  In  your  judgment,  why  could  they  not  make  out  cases  as  well  as  the 
State  Police  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  as  I  could  answer  that.  I  don't  know  exactly  what  the 
State  Police  did. 

Q.  You  say  your  police  could  not  suppress  the  traffic  or  enforce  the  law. 
These  convictions  were  obtained  under  the  State  Police.  I  want  to  know 
why  the  City  Police  could  not  obtain  these  convictions  as  well  as  the  State 
Police  ? 


152  APPENDIX. 

A.  Possibly,  one  of  the  reasons  why  the  State  succeeded  so  well  in  this 
matter,  was  from  the  very  fact  that  indictments  had  been  taken  against  these 
very  parties,  and  this  additional  force  upon  the  parties  was  put  on  by  the 
State  after  some  complaints  had  been  made  by  the  City  Police. 

Q.  The  report  of  your  police  says  they  had  only  arrested  two  hundred  and 
ninety-nine  persons  in  one  year ;  for  that  purpose  this  number  of  arrests  was 
small  ? 

A.  I  am  not  acquainted  with  the  detail  of  that  report;  if  the  chief  was 
present  he  could  explain  that,  or  some  "other  officers  of  the  department. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  ask  whether  you  understand  that  the  Sunday  law  has 
been  pretty  generally  enforced  lately  ? 

A .  Not  more  generally  than  it  has  been  some  two  or  three  times  during 
my  administration. 

Q.     When  was  it  enforced  during  your  administration  ? 

A.  Some  two  or  three  years  since;  I  do  not  know  exactly;  eighteen 
months  or  two  years  since. 

&     How  long  did  that  continue  ? 

A.  Until  we  had  some  trouble  by  some  decisions  of  the  Police  Court  in 
regard  to  a  certain  class  of  cases  where  they  not  only  furnished  liquors,  but 
furnished  meals  ;  and  the  Police  Court  decided  they  had  a  right  to  open  their 
places  to  furnish  their  boarders  with  their  meals ;  and  out  of  that  grew  laxity 
in  the  sale  of  liquors  in  those  places. 

Q.     Whence  did  you  understand  was  their  right  to  sell  ? 

A.     It  was  decided  by  the  court  that  they  have  this  right. 

A.  You  know  the  law  is  that  no  man  can  exercise  the  right  of  a  common 
victualler  without  a  license  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Has  anybody  been  licensed  to  do  that  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  So,  then,  you  permitted  them  to  violate  the  common  victualler's  law 
and  sell  without  a  license,  and  permitted  them  to  sell  liquors  because  they 
were  victuallers  ?  Why  were  they  permitted  to  go  on  as  common  victuallers 
without  a  license  ? 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  At  what  period  of  the  year,  according  to  your 
recollection,  was  this  effort  and  success  in  closing  places  of  traffic  on  Sunday 
of  which  you  speak  ? 

A.     I  think  it  was  during  the  summer. 

Q.     Was  it  not  during  the  session  of  the  legislature  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  think  not.  I  think  it  was  during  the  summer,  because  I 
recollect  the  question  came  up  in  regard  to  ice-creams. 

Q.  Was  it  not  the  latter  part  of  April  or  the  early  part  of  May  ?  Did  it 
not  cover  about  six  weeks  of  the  close  of  the  session  of  the  legislature  ? 

A.     I  don't  think  it  did. 

Q.     Are  you  able  to  say  it  was  not  during  the  latter  part  of  the  session  ? 

A.  I  could  not  say.  If  I  had  supposed  these  questions  would  be  asked  I 
could  have  been  prepared  to  answer  them.  I  came  here  without  preparation. 
If  I  had  supposed  this  would  be  the  line  of  inquiry  I  should  have  come 
prepared  to  answer. 


APPENDIX.  153 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  difficulty  of  getting  convictions.  Did  you  speak  of 
the  prohibitory  law  or  the  nuisance  law  ? 

A.     The  prohibitory  law  more  particularly. 

Q.    Did  you  ascertain  where  the  hitch  in  the  legal  process  was  ? 

A.     In  public  sentiment,  I  think. 

Q.     How  did  public  sentiment  get  hold  of  the  cases  in  court  ? 

A.     In  the  jury. 

Q.  •  The  hitch  was  in  the  jury  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Were  not  the  juries  unanimous  for  conviction  where  the  evidence  was 
clear  ? 

A.     I  could  not  tell.     I  never  went  into  court. 

Q.  Did  it  in  any  way  come  to  your  knowledge  what  the  difficulty  in  the 
jury-box  was  ? 

A.  I  will  state  this  as  an  illustration.  One  year,  before  a  judge,  known 
throughout  the  Commonwealth  as  one  of  the  most  able  men,  and  a  man  who 
has  been  a  warm  advocate  of  the  temperance  cause,  after  I  found  that  con- 
victions had  not  come,  I  went  to  him  and  said,  "  Judge,  can  I  do  anything 
more  as  mayor  of  Boston  in  this  matter  ?  "  and  he  says,  "  No ;  the  same  legis- 
ature  that  passed  the  prohibitory  or  Maine  law  also  passed  the  law  that 
juries  were  judges  of  the  law  as  well  as  the  fact,  and  one  offsets  the  other ; 
and  so  it  was  understood  by  the  politicians,  many  of  them,  who  voted  for  that 
law." 

Q.     You  felt  that  nothing  could  be  done  ? 

A.     I  still  kept  on,  but  I  asked  him — 

Q.  Did  you  undertake  to  raise  the  question  or  consider  the  problem 
whether  the  jury  was  made  up  in  a  way  which  would  not  permit  you 
reasonably  to  expect  a  conviction  ? 

A.     I  had  nothing  to  do  with  making  up  the  juries. 

Q,  Were  you  aware  whether  your  co-officials  were  acting  at  any  time 
with  any  reference  to  the  point  of  difficulty, — the  disagreement  of  the  juries  ? 

A.  I  think  that  my  associates,  or  those  who  were  with  me  in  the  Board  of 
Aldermen,  generally  felt  with  me,  that  it  was  our  duty,  it  being  the  law,  what- 
ever our  views  might  be,  whether  right  or  wrong — it  was  our  duty  to  do  what 
we  could  to  enforce  it. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  they  were  able  to  succeed  in  making  up  a  jury 
that  had  not  a  liquor-seller  in  it  from  1855  to  '65  ? 

A.  The  board  of  aldermen  have  nothing  to  do  with  making  up  juries ; 
that  is,  a  particular  panel. 

Q.  They  had  to  do  with  selecting  the  men  from  whom  juries  were  drawn 
Into  that  list  of  names  were  they  in  the  habit  of  placing  men  known  to  be 
violators  of  the  law  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  I  believe  they  were  all  honorable  men  under  oath  to  do 
their  duty,  and  did  their  duty.  The  question  whether  a  man  was  a  liquor- 
seller,  had  very  little  to  do  with  most  of  them.  It  was  whether  he  was  a  man 
of  good  judgment,  and  generally  competent  to  act  as  a  juror. 

Q.  It  did  not  make  any  particular  difference  whether  they  were  liquor- 
sellers  or  not  ? 

20 


154  APPENDIX. 

A.    I  do  not  suppose  it  did. 

Q.  If  you  could  hare  executed  the  law  you  would  have  been  exceedingly 
glad  to  have  done  so  ? 

A.     It  would  have  been  our  duty  if  there  had  been  any  way. 

Q.  If  there  had  been  any  way  under  the  law  in  which  you  could  have 
executed  the  law,  it  would  have  been  your  duty  ?  Why  did  you  not  use  the 
seizure  clause  ? 

A.  Because  at  that  time  there  was  some  danger  of  personal  responsibility 
under  it.  I  think  it  had  been  decide^  (perhaps  those  better  acquainted  with 
the  subject  can  tell  better,)  in  two  or  three  cases  in  other  counties  that  the 
officer  who  made  the  seizure  was  responsible,  and  then  it  was  an  arbitrary 
act,  and  was  not  exactly  consistent  with  our  principles  and  policy  of 
government. 

Q.  Did  you  feel  that,  as  officers  of  the  city,  you  were  not  financially  safe 
in  executing  the  law  through  that  stringent  measure  ?  We  are  recommended 
to  have  a  stringent  law,  and  the  friends  of  this  law  suggest  that  the  seizure 
clause  is  as  stringent-  as  you  can  have,  and  would  like  to  know  why  that 
clause  was  not  used.  Was  this  decision  such  as  to  make  it  hazardous  ? 

A.     That  was  our  impression. 

Q.     In  what  county  was  that  decision  given  ? 

A.    I  am  not  clear  about  it  now. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  in  the  policy  of  suppressing  the  sale  of  liquors  as 
beverages  ? 

A.    I  do  not. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  have  expressed  your  opinion  in  favor  of  a 
license  law.  I  would  like  to  have  you  give  your  opinion  of  the  details  of  the 
law. 

A.  I  feel  that  this  is  not  the  proper  place  for  me  to  go  into  details.  I 
should  be  very  happy  to  sit  down  with  the  Committee  and  consider  what 
should  be  put  into  this  or  that  section,  and  talk  the  matter  over,  but  I 
do  not  want  to  commit  myself  in  regard  to  the  provisions  of  so  important  an 
Act. 

Q.  So  far  as  you  feel  prepared  to  give  general  details,  I  should  like  to 
have  you  ? 

A.  My  feeling  is,  that  it  is  a  practical  question  ;  that,  considering  the  cus- 
toms and  social  habits  of  our  people,  the  fact  that  this  article  is  used  in  one 
of  the  most  sacred  ordinances  of  the  church,  that  it  is  an  article  of  want 
and  necessity  in  almost  every  family,  the  only  way  is,  to  regulate  its  sale  by 
a  proper  license  law. 

Q.  You  know  that  those  purposes  are  provided  for  especially  under  the 
present  law  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  do  not  know  that  they  are.  There  is  a  feeling  in  the  com- 
munity against  going  in  that  particular  direction  for  those  purposes.  It  is  a 
public  sentiment. 

Q.     Allow  me  to  ask,  whether  you  would  license  respectable  hotels  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     To  sell  liquor  to  be  drank  on  the  premises  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 


APPENDIX.  155 

Q.    At  a  public  bar  ? 

A.    That  is  a  question  to  be  decided  by  those  who  draw  up  such  a  bill. 

Q.  They  will  draw  up  a  bill  which  the  evidence  would  seem  to  indicate. 
We  want  your  judgment  whether  it  is  expedient  to  license  hotels  to  sell  at  a 
public  bar  ? 

A.  I  should  think  there  ought  to  be  easy  facilities  for  strangers  and  others 
to  conform  to  their  customs  at  home. 

Q.  That  is,  if  gentlemen  walk  in  to  have  a  sit  down,  they  should  have  an 
opportunity  of  having  what  liquor  they  call  for  ? 

A.  I  am  very  little  acquainted  with  any  bar-room,  and  do  not  know  about 
the  sitting  down  and  drinking. 

Q.  One  does  not  need  to  have  ever  been  in  a  bar-room  to  have  an  opinion 
on  these  points.  I  ask  whether  you  would  be  in  favor  of  licensing  hotels 
with  a  public  bar.  I  would  like  to  ask — here  are  some  five  or  six  hundred 
grocers  for  supplying  families,  respectable  grocers — would  you  think  it 
expedient  to  license  them  to  supply  families  ? 

A.     A  certain  number  of  them. 

Q.     Have  you  any  idea  how  many  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  any  reason  why  one  respectable  grocer  should  not  have 
the  privilege  as  well  as  any  other  ? 

A.  The  whole  matter  of  the  license  is  for  the  public  good.  The  public 
good  will  be  promoted  by  limiting,  rather  than  by  having  an  indiscriminate 
sale.  That  is  the  reason  we  want  a  license  law,  to  limit  the  number  of  sellers 
and  the  character  and  responsibility  of  the  individuals  who  sell.  Of  course 
the  term  license — the  very  idea  of  a  license  law  is — that  there  must  be  some 
persons  selected  from  the  community  to  whom  the  license  is  given. 

Q.  In  the  case  of  grocers,  suppose  five  hundred  respectable  ones  supply 
families,  doing  the  most  useful  business  that  can  be  done.  You  would  give  a 
monopoly  to  a  portion  of  them  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Precisely  as  you  would  license  people  to  sell  gunpowder. 
You  do  not  license  people  all  along  the  street  to  sell  that. 

Q.     In  gunpowder,  do  they  not  license  any  respectable  man  who  wants  it  ? 

A.  I  do  not  suppose  the  fire  department,  the  engineers  of  the  fire  depart- 
ment who  have  charge  of  it,  would  license  a  large  number  on  one  street. 

Q.    Not  if  they  were  respectable  ? 

A.  They  would  say,  "  There  is  a  license  here  in  this  neighborhood,  and  on 
the  whole  you  can't  have  another  license." 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICII.)  What  proportion  of  the  tenements  in  this  city, 
(suppose  there  are  two  thousand  of  them  in  this  city  where  there  is  sale  of 
intoxicating  liquors,)  what  proportion  of  them  are  owned  by  the  persons  who 
carry  on  the  business  ? 

A .    I  suppose  a  very  small  portion. 

Q.  That  is,  the  real  estate  is  owned  by  parties  who  do  not  carry  on  the 
business  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  are  aware  that  to  rent  or  permit  a  place  to  be  used  for  that 
purpose  is  in  itself  an  offence  ? 


156  APPENDIX. 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    That  is,  for  the  landlord  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  give  notice  to  the  landlords — to  the  owners  of  these 
tenements — that  illegal  traffic  was  carried  on  there  and  order  them  to  see  it 
was  abated  ? 

A.  I  think  the  Chief  of  Police  very  often  took  that  measure  to  break  up 
disorderly  houses. 

Q.    Did  you  ever  know  a  landlord  to  be  prosecuted  ? 

A.  I  think  there  has  been.  I  am  not  able  to  answer  the  question  definitely, 
but  I  think  there  has  been. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  S.  K.  LOTHROP,  D.  D. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  CHILD.)    You  are  pastor  of  the  Brattle  Street  Church  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    How  long  have  you  lived  in  Boston  ? 

A.    Thirty-three  years  next  June. 

Q.  As  to  your  observation  of  the  course  of  the  excessive  use  of  intoxicat- 
ing liquors  under  the  operation  of  the  present  prohibitory  law  ;  whether  it 
has  increased  or  diminished  as  far  as  you  have  an  impression  ? 

A.  My  impression  is  that  it  has  increased;  but  that  is  not  the  result  of 
much  practical  observation  or  personal  experience,  because  my  walks  and  my 
duties  do  not  carry  me  where  I  should  see  the  practical  effect  of  it.  It  is  my 
impression,  founded  rather  on  what  I  read  and  hear  than  upon  my  own  per- 
sonal practical  knowledge. 

Q.  As  to  your  own  opinion,  if  you  have  formed  one,  as  between  a  proper 
license  law  and  the  present  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  My  impression  and  opinion  upon  that  subject  so  far  as  I  have  formed 
one  is,  that  hardly  anything  could  be  worse  than  the  present  state  of  things ; 
hardly  any  license  law  could  be  framed  that  would  not  be  more  operative, 
and  therefore  more  beneficial  than  a  law  which  is  all  but  universally  trampled 
upon. 

Q.  So  far  as  you  are  acquainted  with  public  sentiment  within  your  own 
sphere  of  association  and  labors,  what  is  the  opinion  entertained  by  citizens 
within  your  own  sphere  of  observation  ? 

A .     I  should  think  generally  it  was  the  opinion  I  have  already  expressed. 

Q.     That  opinion  would  lead  to  a  license  law  rather  than  the  present  law  ? 

A.    I  think  it  would. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  strong  and  general  within  your  own  sphere  of  obser- 
vation this  opinion  is  as  to  the  impracticability  of  the  present  law  ? 

A.  I  should  think  the  impression  was  very  strong  indeed.  I  supposed  the 
impression  throughout  the  whole  Commonwealth  was,  that  experience  having 
proved  the  impracticability  of  its  execution,  pronounced  the  present  law 
unwise  and  injudicious  and  unjust,  because  only  capable  of  partial  execution. 
I  did  not  know  that  anybody  undertook  to  maintain  now  that  it  was  possible 
absolutely  to  execute  the  present  law  upon  the  subject.  I  supposed  that  was 
a  foregone  conclusion  in  the  public  mind.  1  should  suppose  from  my  own 


APPENDIX.  157 

observation  and  reading  that  the  people  of  the  Commonwealth  had  generally 
reached  that  conclusion. 

Q.  What  is  the  opinion  you  entertain  in  regard  to  the  effect  of  either  class 
of  legislation  upon  the  promotion  of  the  cause  of  temperance,  a  license  system 
properly  regulated,  or  the  present  system  as  it  is  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  as  I  have  any  opinion  upon  that.  I  do  not  think  very 
highly  of  the  effect  of  legislation  in  promoting  the  cause  of  temperance  in  any 
way.  As  to  the  result  of  my  experience  for  the  last  thirty-five  years,  I  should 
think  that  any  wise  license  law  would  probably  have  a  better  effect  upon  tem- 
perance than  the  present  law. 

Q.  So  far  as  falls  within  the  sphere  of  your  own  observation,  does  the  feel- 
ing with  regard  to  the  present  law  prevent  men  from  co-operating  to  restrain 
intemperance  by  any  other  means  ? 

A .    I  should  think  it  did  to  a  very  considerable  extent. 
Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     Do  you  recollect  anything  of  the  history  of 
license  laws  here  to  know  how  they  operated  when  they  existed  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  do  not.  I  have  not  made  that  a  subject  of  study  to  any  very 
great  extent.  I  have  always  looked  upon  the  subject  of  temperance,  in  its 
moral  light,  in  relation  to  the  moral  means  which  are  to  be  used  to  promote 
it  and  prevent  intemperance,  rather  than  to  the  effect  of  legal  means,  and 
therefore  I  confess  I  signed  this  petition  for  a  license  law  because  I  felt,  as 
I  have  stated,  that  hardly  anything  could  be  worse  than  what  I  understand  to 
be  the  present  state  of  things  in  regard  to  the  existing  law.  I  felt  that 
through  this  petition  for  a  license  law  some  law  might  be  enacted  which  could 
be  executed,  and  that  any  law  which  could  be  and  was  thoroughly  executed 
was  better  for  a  community  than  a  quantity  of  laws  upon  the  statute  book 
which  are  not  and  cannot  be  executed.  Nothing  is  more  demoralizing  to  a 
community,  I  conceive,  than  that.  With  this  impression,  therefore,  and 
without  any  experience  or  thorough  study  of  the  operation  of  a  license  law,  I 
signed  the  petition. 

Q.     We  had  license  laws  a  good  many  years  in  this  city  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     You  know  nothing  of  their  operation  ? 

A.     Very  little. 

Q.  Have  you  any  recollection  whether  they  enforced  the  law  against  the 
unlicensed  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  I  have  any  knowledge  or  recollection  upon  that  fact. 

Q.  You  seem  to  think  the  law  is  not  enforced  at  all.  Do  you  know  how 
that  is  in  the  country  towns  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  I  do.  I  have  heard  many  persons,  who  I  supposed 
knew,  say  that  it  was  not  executed,  and  whenever  I  have  needed  anything 
prohibited  by  the  law  in  any  part  of  the  State  where  I  happened  to  be  I  have 
easily  obtained  it. 

Q.     They  take  special  pains  to  supply  clergymen,  I  suppose  ? 

A.     I  dp  not  know  but  they  do. 

Q,  Is  it  customary  with  religious  conventions  to  have  it  supplied  to  the 
clergy  ? 

A.    I  have  never  seen  it  done. 


158  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Have  you  noticed  anything  of  the  operations  of  the  constabulary  in  the 
city  ? 

A.  I  have  noticed  the  reports  in  the  papers,  and  have  sometimes 
happened  to  be — once  at  least  I  happened  to  be  going  by  a  place  at  the 
South  End — where  a  crowd  was  assembled,  and  was  told  that  the  force  were 
making  a  seizure. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  of  operations  of  that  kind  as  to  the  expediency  of 
them?  Will  They  tend  to  suppress  the  traffic  ? 

A.  1  Mippose  it  has  only  tended  to  suppress  it  in  the  particular  instance 
where  the  liquors  have  been  seized  and  the  persons  brought  before  the  courts. 
I  do  not  suppose  it  has  stopped  anybody  else. 

Q.     Suppose  they  go  on  and  seize  them  all  ? 

A.    I  wish  they  would  as  long  as  the  law  remains  on  the  statute  book. 

Q.  On  the  whole,  your  idea  is  that  moral  means  are  the  best  means  to 
carry  forward  this  reform  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     That  you  cannot  expect  anything  from  any  kind  of  law  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  you  can  expect  a  great  deal  from  a  law  which  makes  that 
a  crime  and  a  wrong,  which,  in  itself  considered,  and  by  itself  considered,  is 
not  a  crime  or  a  wrong.  I  do  rely  upon  moral  means,  principally,  for  all  moral 
objects  must  be  accomplished  principally  and  chiefly  by  moral  means,  or  by 
the  moral  influence  of  the  agencies  employed.  Our  government  rules,  and 
must  rule  principally  and  chiefly,  by  moral  agencies  and  influences,  rather  than 
by  law  and  force ;  and,  therefore,  I  do  not  think  that,  in  regard  to  temperance, 
much  can  be  done  by  law,  especially  a  law  so  framed  that  by  its  enactments 
it  makes  that  to  be  always  criminal  and  wrong  in  itself,  which,  under  many 
circumstances,  and  in  and  by  itself  considered,  is  not  a  crime  and  a  wrong. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  it  a  wrong  for  a  man  to  set  up  a  dram-shop  and  give 
drams  to  anybody  who  pleases  to  come  ? 

A.  I  should  not  think  it  a  good  kind  of  business  ;  but  if  I  wanted  to  pre- 
vent it  by  law,  I  think  I  should  rather  punish  the  man  who  went  and  took  the 
drams  than  the  men  who  sold  them. 

Q.     Then  the  tempter  is  not  so  bad  as  the  tempted  ? 

A.  That  docs  not  follow  from  my  position.  I  mean  this  :  if,  for  instance, 
I  was  going  to  prevent  murder  by  a  punishment  for  it,  I  would  not  punish  the 
man  who  made  the  knife  or  the  pistol  that  was  used  in  the  deed,  but  the  man 
who  made  an  improper  use  of  them  in  committing  the  murder. 

Q.  Then  you  consider  the  keeping  of  a  dram-shop  not  a  beneficial 
occupation  for  the  community  ? 

A.    No,  sir;  not  particularly  beneficial. 

Q.    It  is  evil  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  much  evil  springs  from  it. 

Q.     Why  would  you  not  suppress  it  if  it  is  an  evil,  if  you  could  do  it  ? 

A.  I  think  the  best  way  to  suppress  it  would  be  to  punish  every  man  who 
makes  an  unnecessary  use  of  it.  Unless  the  ground  is  taken  that  no  man 
ever  needs,  or  may  innocently  take  any  stimulants,  it  follows  that  there  may 
be  occasions  when  he  does  need  and  may  take  them,  and  therefore  it  may  be 
important  or  necessary  that  there  should  be  places  where  he  can  obtain  what 


APPENDIX.  159 

for  the  moment  he  needs.  Let  those  who  choose  be  ready  under  proper  reg- 
ulations, to  meet  the  actual  wants  of  others  in  this  respect.  If  they  encour- 
age abuses  I  would  have  them  punished ;  but  I  would  punish  first  the  man 
who  abused  himself  and  his  opportunities. 

Q.     By  that  you  mean  the  man  who  uses  it  to  excess  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Our  law  does  punish  those.  Some  fifteen  or  twenty  thousand  a  year 
are  hauled  up  and  punished  ;  but  is  it  not  a  temptation  to  a  man  to  drink  to 
excess  if  a  grog-shop  is  open  at  every  corner  of  the  street  ?  Would  not  more 
men  be  drawn  into  that  habit,  than  if  there  were  not  such  places  ? 

A.    I  suppose  there  would. 

Q.     Then  you  would  not  punish  the  seller  as  well  as  him  that  uses  ? 

A.  I  admitted  that  I  would  punish  him  if  he  encouraged  abuses,  but  to 
prevent  intemperance,  I  would  punish  first  the  man  who  abused  his  moral 
freedom  by  being  guilty  of  it. 

Q.     Our  laws  punish  exactly  that  class  of  drunkards  you  speak  of. 

A.  I  am  glad  they  do.  This  whole  subject  of  course,  like  every  great 
social  question,  is  full  of  difficulties.  I  don't  suppose  we  can  hit  upon  any 
plan  that  will  make  men  saints  and  angels,  entirely  prevent  all  intemperance 
and  excess,  or  change  life  from  what  God  appointed  it  to  be,  a  scene  of  trial 
and  temptation,  through  the  discipline  of  which  the  individual  heart  and  con- 
science are  to  form  a  noble  character  and  attain  to  a  holy  life.  All  that  we 
can  hope  to  do  through  human  law,  in  relation  to  any  subject,  is  to  enact  such 
laws,  devise  such  plans  as,  from  experience  and  observation,  we  think  on  the 
whole  are  the  best  and  will  do  the  most  good.  A  perfect  law  that  shall  pre- 
vent all  intemperance  and  do  nothing  but  good,  we  cannot  devise.  The  pres- 
ent law  in  this  State,  seems  to  me  to  be  a  very  imperfect  one.  It  does  not 
seem  to  be  doing  any  great  good,  but  much  harm.  I  think  that  something 
better  might  be  done  by  a  license  law,  which  would  aim  to  regulate  and  con- 
trol, rather  than  by  a  prohibitory  law  which  you  cannot  execute.  That  is 
simply  my  position. 

Q.  You  rather  hope  to  find  something  better  than  the  present  law,  with- 
out any  precise  knowledge  or  experience  as  to  the  working  of  a  license  law  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  do  not  expect  much  from  any  law — less  from  a  prohibitory 
law  than  any  other. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EX-MAYOR  JOSEPH  M.  WIGHTMAN. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  When  were  you  connected  with  the  city  govern- 
ment in  Boston,  and  how  long  ? 

A.  As  member  of  the  School  Committee  from  1846  to  '51.  From  April 
1856  until  '59  as  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Aldermen ;  and  in  the  years 
1861  and  '62  as  Mayor  of  the  city  of  Boston. 

Q.  I  will  ask  you  to  state  generally  any  opinion  you  have  formed  from 
your  own  official  connection  with  the  government  and  the  administration  of 
the  laws,  as  to  the  effect  of  the  present  law  upon  the  excessive  use  of 
intoxicating  liquors  ? 


160  APPENDIX. 

• 

A.  According  to  my  observation  ever  since  the  establishment  of  the  pro- 
hibitory law,  it  has  been  of  certainly  no  benefit  to  the  city  of  Boston  or  the 
community,  but  a  great  disadvantage  to  the  government  of  it. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  in  regard  to  the  increase  in  the  excessive  use  or  the 
quantity  sold '? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  in  my  own  mind  but  what  the  traffic  has  increased 
rather  than  diminished  from  the  effects  of  the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  Your  opinion  as  to  the  practicability  of  the  enforcement  of  the  present 
law,  by  the  various  civil  officers  and  in  the  way  of  the  courts  ? 

A.  So  far  as  my  own  experience  goes  in  the  city  government,  there  was, 
while  I  was  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Aldermen,  and  Mayor,  an  earnest 
desire  to  carry  out  the  laws  passed  by  the  Legislature.  Arrests  were  made  by 
the  police  under  the  orders  of  the  Committee  on  Police,  and  also  by  the 
Mayor.  These  having  been  made,  were  sent  to  the  courts  to  be  tried.  The 
accumulation  was  so  great,  I  recollect,  under  Mayor  Lincoln's  administra- 
tion, while  I  was  Chairman  of  the  Board  of  Aldermen,  that  the  acccumula- 
tion  of  the  cases  put  before  the  courts  by  the  police  was  so  enormous,  that  the 
request  was  made  not  to  send  any  more  cases  in  until  those  had  been  attended 
to — until  they  were  adjudicated  upon. 

Q.     All  was  done  that  could  be,  in  the  way  of  enforcement  ? 

A.    I  endeavored  to  do  it  while  I  was  in  office. 

Q.     Was  any  effect  produced  by  your  attempt  to  diminish  the  traffic  ? 

A.    I  do  not  think  there  was,  at  all. 

Q.  What  is  the  public  sentiment  in  regard  to  that  law,  as  far  as  you  have 
observed  it  in  Boston,  and  had  it  any  influence  on  the  enforcement  of  it  ? 

A.  The  public  sentiment  in  regard  to  a  law  would,  of  course,  only  influ- 
ence the  mind  of  an  individual  according  to  the  circle  or  stand-point  from 
which  he  derived  the  opinion.  For  myself,  I  considered,  officially,  that  the 
prohibitory  law  was  obnoxious  to  the  sentiments  of  the  people ;  and  this  was 
expressed  clearly,  to  my  mind,  in  the  juries  before  whom  many  of  those  cases 
were  sent. 

Q.  Have  you  any  statistics  as  to  some  of  your  operations,  or  any  facts  or 
letters  bearing  upon  the  execution  of  the  law  ? 

A.  I  have.  I  made  it  a  test  question  early  in  my  mayoralty.  The  ques- 
tion came  up  before  the  Board  of  Aldermen.  I  think  the  Rev.  Mr.  Kirk,  and 
some  four  or  five  thousand  other  citizens,  came  before  the  Board  of  Alder- 
men on  the  subject  of  closing  places  on  Sunday — the  saloons,  sale  of  liquors, 
etc.  The  matter  was  referred  to  me  by  the  Board  of  Aldermen,  and  in 
March,  1861, 1  requested  or  gave  an  order  to  the  Chief  of  Police  to  furnish 
me,  through  the  several  officers,  a  statement  of  every  man  whose  saloon  was 
open,  and  for  what  purpose,  and  his  name  and  place  of  residence.  That  was 
done.  My  impression  is,  the  number  reported  open  on  Sunday  at  that  time, 
which  had  become  very  marked,  was  272.  The  question  in  my  mind-  then, 
was  not  whether  I  ought  to  enforce  the  Sunday  law,  but  as  to  the  manner  of 
enforcing  the  Sunday  law.  I  went  to  the  84th  chapter  of  the  Revised  Stat- 
utes, and,  on  examination,  I  found  that  the  statute  then  in  force  was  just  as 
strong  against  a  man  who  rode  with  his  wife  and  children  through  the  streets 
to  church,  as  it  was  against  Peter  B.  Brigham,  who  kept  a  dozen  men  mixing 


APPENDIX. 

brandy  smashes  and  mint  juleps  on  Sunday.  The  first  section  was  in  refer- 
ence to  travel  on  the  Lord's  Day,  except  for  necessity  and  charity,  for  which, 
on  conviction,  a  party  was  to  be  fined  not  exceeding  $10.  The  fourth  section 
was,  if  any  man  kept  his  place  open  for  refreshment,  selling  liquors,  etc.,  he 
was  also  subject  to  the  same  penalty.  Under  these  circumstances,  I  thought 
a  plea  made  to  our  citizens,  in  a  spirit  of  gentlemanly  courtesy,  would  have  a 
much  better  effect  than  issuing  an  order  through  the  Chief  of  Police  to 
arrest  them.  I,  therefore,  had  printed  a  request,  of  which  this  is  a  copy  : — 

"  SIR  : — By  the  Statutes  of  the  Commonwealth,  which  are  herewith  an- 
nexed, it  is  made  the  duty  of  the  Police  to  inquire  into  all  offences  against 
the  same,  and  cause  the  law  to  be  carried  into  effect. 

"  By  a  return  made  to  the  Mayor,  it  appears  that  yon  are  amenable  to  the 
charge  of  violating  the  law  in  this  respect,  and  in  conformity  with  the  request 
of  the  Board  of  Aldermen,  and  the  convictions  of  the  Mayor  that  the  welfare 
of  the  city  requires  the  law  to  be  more  strictly  enforced,  you  are  hereby 
requested  to  close  your  places  of  business  during  the  Lord's  day,  which  is 
from  midnight  on  Saturday  to  midnight  on  Sunday. 

"  The  Mayor  relies  upon  your  compliance  with  this  request  immediately, 
and  thus  prevent  any  further  action  on  his  part." 

This  order  was  issued,  folded  in  this  form  and  sent  to  every  one  of  the  two 
hundred  and  seventy-two  sellers,  and  the  result  of  it  was  that,  the  following  Sun- 
day on  a  careful  report,  without  any  further  action  on  the  part  of  the  mayor, 
at  this  request,  they  were  all  closed  but  fifteen.  The  following  Sunday  there 
were  but  five,  and  two  of  those  were  among  the  most  wealthy  dealers  or 
saloon-keepers  in  the  city  of  Boston.  That  continued  until  the  war  com- 
menced. In  April,  after  the  firing  on  Fort  Sumter,  the  citizens  made  a 
request  to  me  that  I  should  not  stringently  enforce  this,  for  there  were  no 
Sundays  in  revolutionary  times ;  and,  therefore,  as  they  were  recruiting  on 
Sundays,  that  the  places  might  be  suffered  to  remain  open.  I  did  not  grant  it 
officially ;  I  did  not  repeal  the  order,  but  I  found  that  then  the  public  sentiment 
was  not  to  regard  the  Sunday  as  the  Lord's  Day,  but  to  continue  the  work 
of  recruiting  for  the  army  and  keeping  places  open  just  the  same  as  usual.  I 
am,  therefore,  satisfied  from  this  in  my  own  mind  that  our  citizens,  and  my 
experience  in  all  my  official  life  has  been  that  the  citizens  of  Boston  are  pre- 
eminently law-abiding,  and  desire  to  obey  the  laws.  There  were  in  some  of 
these  cases  $70,  $80,  or  $100  dollars  profit  on  the  liquor  sold  on  Sundays,  yet 
on  a  mere  request,  without  any  force  otherwise  than  as  contained  in  this  docu- 
ment, they  were  all  shut  up,  and  willing  to  be  shut  up,  and  obeyed  the  law  at 
once.  I  therefore  inferred  that,  if  a  license  law  was  adopted  by  the  legis- 
lature, there  would  be  no  place  in  the  State  where  the  law  would  be 
obeyed  with  more  fidelity  than  in  the  city  of  Boston. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  as  to  the  practicability  of  enforcing  a  license  law 
so  as  to  check  the  improper  sale  and  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.  I  have  not.  I  was  going  to  observe  in  regard  to  a  license  law,  that  I 
should  hope  a  license  law  might  be  incorporated  into  the  present  prohibitory 
law,  leaving  it  to  the  cities  and  towns,  the  mayor  and  aldermen  of  cities  and 
the  selectmen  of  towns,  to  regulate  this  traffic,  and  dispense  licenses  according^ 
to  their  judgment. 

Q.     And  leave  the  prohibitory  law  against  any  others  ? 

21 


APPENDIX. 

A.  I  think  the  prohibitory  law  has  been,  or  the  present  series  of  laws 
which  culminate  in  the  prohibitory  law  as  the  result  of  a  series  of  legislative 
acts  have  been,  for  the  suppression  of  the  traffic,  very  highly  perfected.  The 
legislature  then  by  engrafting  upon  them  a  permissory  law  like  a  license  law, 
and  allowing  the  discretion  to  be  in  the  several  communities  or  officers  of 
those  communities,  that  then  when  the  conditions  of  that  permission  were 
violated,  the  laws  at  present  existing  are  amply  sufficient  for  the  protection 
of  the  citizens  and  the  community.  * 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Why  do  you  think  the  present  law,  of  which  you 
just  now  speak  so  highly,  but  which  a  little  while  ago  had  done  so  much  harm, 
would  be  so  cheerfully  acquiesced  in  when  you  engraft  upon  it  a  permissory 
law  ? 

A.  Because  the  prohibition  or  the  very  element  of  the  law  would  be 
destroyed.  The  present  prohibitory  law  prohibits  the  sale  under  any  and  all 
circumstances.  Of  course,  the  modification  of  it  would  be  engrafting  upon  it 
the  right  to  issue  licenses. 

Q.  That  is,  you  think  the  license  law  would  nullify  and  reverse  the  essen- 
tial principle  of  the  present  law  ? 

A.     Modify  it  and  render  it  acceptable  to  the  community. 

Q.     Is  there  any  provision  for  the  sale  of  alcoholic  liquors  for  any  purpose  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  not  license  to  sell  the  precise  antagonism  of  the  principle  of  prohibi- 
tion as  a  beverage  ? 

A.     In  terms  they  are. 

Q.  You  propose  to  engraft  a  law  upon  the  existing  law  that  shall  reverse 
its  principle  ? 

A.  I  propose  to  engraft  upon  the  existing  law  a  principle  that  will  take 
away  the  entire  prohibitory  action  of  the  present  law  and  modify  it,  and  at 
the  same  time  hold  on  to  those  provisions  of  the  prohibitory  law  which  may 
be  found  necessary  for  the  carrying  of  the  modified  law. 

Q.  Under  what  law  were  the  cases  brought  by  which  the  courts  were 
blocked  ? 

A .    I  have  not  in  my  mind  the  chronology  of  the  laws. 

Q.    What  was  the  difficulty  in  getting  convictions  at  that  period  ? 

A .     The  difficulty  lies  in  the  juries. 

Q.  What  appeared  to  be  the  difficulty  in  the  juries  ?  Did  the  difficulty 
appear  to  lie  in  any  particular  class  of  juries  or  portion  of  them  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  could  answer  the  question,  because  I  have  not 
.any  personal  knowledge  of  the  juries.  In  regard  to  the  juries  who  tried 
these  cases,  I  could  not  judge  whether  they  were  influenced  or  not. 

Q.  Had  you  any  general  understanding  at  that  time  as  to  whether  one 
class  were  less  ready  to  convict  than  another  ? 

A.     What  do  you  mean  by  class  ? 

Q.    Men  engaged  in  one  kind  of  business  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  do  not  think  there  was  any  difference  in  regard  to  the  decis- 
ion of  questions  "before  the  jury.  I  do  not  think,  from  my  own  experience  on 
the  jury,  that  it  made  any  difference  in  regard  to  the  verdict  of  that  jury, 
whether  there  were  liquor-sellers  upon  it  in  a  liquor-selling  case  or  not. 


APPENDIX.  163 

Q.  You  are  not  aware  during  your  official  labor  that  liquor-sellers  were 
less  ready  to  convict  than  other  persons  ? 

A.  I  should  think  that  those  who  were  not  liquor-sellers  upon  a  jury  were 
not  more  ready  to  convict  than  liquor-dealers. 

Q.     In  no  case  ? 

A.     I  have  known  of  none. 

Q.  Have  you  never  known  of  a  case  where  there  was  a  given  number, 
one,  two,  or  three  liquor-sellers  on  a  jury,  where  they  stood  nine  to  three,  the 
three  being  liquor-sellers,  or  equivalent  to  that  ? 

A.     That  would  involve  my  experience  as  a  juryman.    I  have  not. 

Q.  I  do  not  desire  to  confine  the  question  to  your  experience  as  a  juryman 
but  to  your  general  knowledge  of  the  operations  of  juries  during  the  time  of 
your  official  administration. 

A.     I  have  never  heard  that. 

Q.     Have  you  ever  heard  that  alleged  ? 

'A.    Not  from  any  authority  I  should  regard  as  worthy  of  notice. 

Q.  Never  had  any  intimation  from  courts  or  attorneys  that  such  was 
substantially  the  fact  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Whether  you  as  an  alderman  ever  had  any  discussion  as  to  whether 
it  was  proper  to  exclude  liquor-dealers  from  the  jury  list  ? 

A.  My  impression  is  that  at  a  certain  hearing  before  the  Board  of  Alder- 
men that  parties  have  appeared  on  such  occasions.  I  think  Rev.  Mr.  Miner 
is  one. 

Q.    Do  you  remember  anybody  else  who  appeared  ? 

A.  I  do  not.  I  will  not  say  that  Mr.  Miner  did.  He  was  before  the 
board  of  aldermen  several  times  while  I  was  on  the  board,  pressing  certain 
temperance  views,  and  my  impression  is  that  was  one  of  his  strong  points. 

Q.     Namely  ? 

A.  That  liquor-sellers  or  dealers  in  spirituous  liquors  being  declared  by 
the  law  criminals  to  a  certain  extent  that  they  were  not  competent  and  ought 
not  to  be  suffered  to  be  drawn  upon  juries.  That  is  the  impression  I  got. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  the  Rev.  Mr.  Fuller,  since  deceased,  as  chaplain  in 
the  army,  being  before  the  aldermen  urging  those  views  ? 

A.    I  do  not  recollect  it. 

Q.    You  remember  the  Hon.  Mr.  Russell  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.  Those  views  were  distinctly  urged.  Did  you  or  did  you  not  assent  to 
them? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  You  do  not  believe  it  is  improper  to  put  liquor-sellers  in  a  jury  box  to 
try  their  fellow  liquor-sellers  ? 

A.  Perhaps  if  I  was  counsel  in  a  case  or  attorney  of  the  Commonwealth, 
if  I  knew  that  a  liquor  case  was  to  come  up,  and  a  man  who  was  a  known 
liquor-seller  with  large  interests  was  on  the  panel,  I  think  I  might  then  as 
counsel  challenge  him,  but  it  was  not  in  the  power  nor  was  it  the  duty  of  the 
Board  of  Aldermen  to  say  that. 


164  APPENDIX. 

Q.  But  the  board  of  aldermen  select,  from  the  whole  number  of  citizens 
in  their  respective  wards,  a  certain  number  to  act  as  jurors  ?  What  is  the 
provision  of  the  law  as  to  the  qualification  of  the  jurors  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  And  in  regard  to  that  I  will  state  the  exact  manner  in 
which  jurors  are  chosen  in  the  city  of  Boston.  Early  in  the  year,  after  the 
election  of  an  alderman,  the  city  clerk  furnishes  him  with  or  sends  to  his  house 
a  notice  of  the  number  of  jurors  that  he,  as  alderman  of  a  certain  ward,  is  to 
select,  and  a  list  of  the  qualified  voters  of  the  ward  and  a  directory.  For 
instance,  as  alderman  I  am  required  to  select  one  hundred  and  fifty  from 
Ward  Ten 

Q.  Has  it  been  the  custom  of  the  city,  as  far  as  your  knowledge  has 
extended,  to  furnish  the  use  of  a  boat  which  the  city  owns  or  has  owned  at 
some  period,  plying  in  the  harbor  ? 

A.  The  city  has  owned  what  is  called  the  quarantine  boat,  and  also  the 
Una. 

Q.  Has  it  been  customary  to  tender  the  use  of  that  boat  to  school  com- 
mittees, and  conventions  of  various  kinds,  for  excursion  purposes  ? 

A.  It  is  not  tendered.  When  any  body  connected  with  the  city  govern- 
ment desire  to  go  themselves,  or  take  their  friends  down  the  harbor,  they 
apply  to  the  Committee  on  External  Health,  and  the  chairman  of  that  com- 
mittee grants  it  or  not. 

Q.  Among  the  refreshments  used  on  those  occasions,  have  liquors  been 
included  ? 

A.  I  have  no  personal  knowledge  in  regard  to  that,  because  the  matter 
of  refreshments  is  entirely  in  the  control  of  the  committee  who  have  charge 
of  the  boat. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  whether  the  city  has  paid  bills  of  that 
character — heavy  bills  ? 

A.     I  have  no  doubt  of  it. 

Q.  Is  the  same  thing  done  in  regard  to  the  committees  of  the  city  govern- 
ment ?  Bills-  for  liquors  are  commonly  paid  by  the  city  treasury  ? 

A.     I  have  answered  the  question  as  to  what  my  knowledge  was. 

Q.  I  speak  now  of  the  committees  of  the  city  government ;  the  committee 
on  charitable  institutions,  for  instance.  I  suppose  the  same  thing  is  done  in 
regard  to  that  committee  as  you  have  testified  to  touching  excursions  ? 

A.  That  depends  upon  the  committee.  There  is  nothing  that  prevents 
their  supplying  to  the  boats  just  what  refreshments  they  please. 

Q.     That  often  happens  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  of  it.  It  depends  upon  the  character  of  the  persons 
and  their  desires,  and  what  they  call  refreshments. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  possibility  of  enforcing  a  license  law.  Do  you 
think  it  would  have  efficacy  because  it  opens  the  door  for  everybody  to  use 
liquor  as  a  beverage  who  desire  it  ? 

A.  That  is  not  what  I  propose.  The  restriction  of  the  use  of  spirit  as  a 
beverage  should,  as  I  said,  in  my  judgment,  be  under  the  control  of  such  rules 
and  regulations  as  might  be  decided  upon  by  the  mayor  and  aldermen  of 
cities,  the  selectmen  of  towns,  or  the  commissioners  of  counties. 


APPENDIX.  165 

Q  My  question  was,  whether  the  idea  of  a  license  law — the  fact  that 
there  was  a  legal  sale  for  those  who  desire  to  drink  moderately — was  an  ele- 
ment that  would  make  it  acceptable  to  the  people,  and  secure  the  enforce- 
ment of  the  prohibitory  law  on  the  unlicensed  ? 

A.     I  think  so. 


TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  NEHEMIAH  ADAMS,  D.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     You  are  a  pastor  of  the  Essex  Street  Church  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  in  Boston  ? 

A.     Thirty-three  years  next  March. 

Q.  Have  you  formed  an  opinion,  from  the  sphere  of  your  observation  and 
the  circle  in  which  you  move,  as  to  the  effect  of  the  present  prohibitory  law, 
in  checking  the  improper  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.  My  conviction  has  been,  and  is  now,  that  it  is  a  failure,  and  for  the 
reason  that  it  is  against  the  light  of  nature.  From  all  I  have  seen  and  from 
all  my  endeavors  to  promote  temperance  by  preaching  and  in  private,  I  am 
satisfied  that  the  true  way  to  promote  temperance,  is  for  the  legislature  to 
make  an  enactment  for  the  restriction  and  regulation  of  the  sale  of  spirituous 
liquors.  I  believe  in  some  form  of  legislation  upon  the  subject.  It  is  a  mat- 
ter upon  which  the  legislature  can  legitimately  exercise  its  authority.  As  a 
matter  of  private  opinion,  I  have  never  been  in  favor  of  the  expression, 
"  License  Law."  There  is  a  sort  of  logic  in  the  objection,  and  we  are  met 
with  the  objection  that  it  is  licensing  sin,  and  cases  that  are  supposed 
to  be  parallel  are  brought  up,  some  of  which  are  difficult ;  but  a  law 
restricting  and  regulating  the  sale  of  ardent  spirits,  I  believe  to  be  the  true 
way  of  preventing  intemperance,  as  far  as  legislation  can  do  it.  I  believe  it 
would  have  that  effect.  One  reason  why  I  think  it  would  have  that  effect,  is 
that  it  would  bring  religious  and  moral  influences  into  the  field  and  give  them 
fair  play.  In  my  own  experience,  before  this  prohibitory  legislation  was 
enacted,  I  used  to  see  the  effect  of  preaching  upon  this  subject,  taking  for  the 
ground  the  doctrine  of  the  old  Massachusetts  Temperance  Society,  that  the  use 
of  distilled  and  fermented  liquors  is  never  useful  to  a  person  in  health ;  taking 
that  as  the  moral  and  economical  ground.  Then  as  regards  the  misuse,  put- 
ting it  on  the  ground  of  sin  against  God — "  No  drunkard  shall  inherit  the  king- 
dom of  God," — "  Into  it  nothing  shall  come  that  defileth" — and  showing  what 
debasement  of  the  body,  which  is  the  temple  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  the 
soul,  drunkenness  is.  I  have  seen  the  power  of  these  pleas,  but  when  this 
prohibitory  arrangement  began  we  found  that  the  pulpit  was  entirely  useless. 
They  would  require  of  us  to  take  certain  positions  which  we  were  not  able  to 
take,  and  it  left  us  entirely  in  the  rear,  and  it  seems  to  me,  the  power  of  the 
pulpit  upon  this  subject,  has  been  entirely  neutralized  ever  since  this  was 
inaugurated.  When  a  man  is  at  white  heat,  if  you  are  only  red-hot,  you 
seem  to  be  cold  to  him.  So  with  those  who  go  to  extreme  lengths  in 
regard  to  these  matters.  If  the  preacher  does  not  preach  or  pray  according 
to  their  thermometer,  he  receives  anonymous  letters  and  all  sorts  of  abuse  in 
regard  to  it ;  that  he  is  an  enemy  of  temperance  and  opposed  to  virtue  ;  and 


166  APPENDIX. 

so  most  ministers  of  niy  acquaintance  have  become  disgusted  with  the  thing 
and  retired  from  the  field. 

Q.  I  will  inquire  what  opinions  upon  this  same  subject  are  entertained  by 
the  members  and  officers  of  your  own  church  ? 

A.  I  never  had  any  personal  conversation  with  them  on  the  subjec.t  as  a 
matter  of  discussion,  but  my  impression  is  that  they  would  agree  with  me  in 
this  matter.  If  I  am  allowed,  I  will  say  I  think  the  weight  of  opinion  in  the 
clergy  of  the  denomination  to  which  I  belong  tends  in  the  same  way,  and 
they  are  all  strong  temperance  men.  I  am  not  acquainted  with  a  man  who  is 
not  a  strong  friend  of  temperance  in  our  denomination,  and  I  think  the 
weight  of  opinion  among  them  would  all  go  in  that  direction. 
Q.  What  is  your  denomination  ? 

A.  We  are  called  Orthodox  Congregation alists ;  sometimes  Trinitarian 
Congregationalists. 

Q.  Is  your  observation  in  regard  to  the  opinion  of  the  clergy  confined  to 
Boston,  or  does  it  extend  through  the  Commonwealth  ? 

A.  Through  the  Commonwealth.  I  am  not  acquainted  with  a  clergyman 
of  my  denomination  in  Boston  who  would  not  agree  with  me  on  this  point, 
and  I  have  met  men  from  distant  parts  of  the  Common  wealth,  as  well  as  from 
the  interior,  who  are  stronger  even  than  any  of  my  brethren  about  here.  I 
think  the  strong,  sober  common  sense  of  the  clergy  of  our  denomination  is 
that  way. 

Q.    Were  you  present  at  the  National  Congregational  Union  when  this 
matter  of  attempting  to  commit  it  to  the  prohibitory  law  came  up  ? 
A.     I  was  not  present. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  I  understand  you  to  express  your  approbation  of 
the  principle  of  total  abstinence  upon  the  use  of  liquor  as  a  beverage.  You 
said  that  the  old  Massachusetts  Temperance  Society  took  that  ground  ? 

A.  As  a  matter  of  expediency,  I  do  not  think  that  the  use  of  it  is  a  sin 
against  God ;  I  do  think  it  is  never  useful  to  people  in  health. 

Q.  Did  I  misunderstand  you  when  I  understood  you  to  say  as  a  matter  of 
expediency  that  that  is  the  true  doctrine  of  abstinence  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  think  it  is  to  people  in  health.  I  think  every  man  must  be 
the  judge  whether  lie  is  in  health,  with  the  advice  of  his  physician. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say,  so  far  as  you  knew,  every  clergyman  was  of 
your  opinion  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  said  the  "  weight."  In  regard  to  the  clergy  of  Boston,  I 
know  of  no  one  of  my  denomination  who  is  not  of  that  way  of  thinking,  and 
I  think  that  the  weight  of  opinion  in  the  Commonwealth  is  that  way  of  late. 
I  think  some  years  ago,  (not  many  years)  the  opinion  was  in  the  other  way ; 
but  I  think  the  result  of  experiment  and  experience  has  led  them  to  this  con- 
viction, that  the  better  way  to  promote  temperance  is  to  restrict  and  regulate 
it,  and  not  totally  prohibit  it. 

Q.  As  to  the  practical  matter  of  the  habits  of  the  people,  you  stated  that 
they  were  all  in  favor  of  total  abstinence  from  the  use  of  liquor  as  a  bever- 
age— all  in  Boston  ? 

A.  I  made  a  negative  statement.  I  say  they  are  not  in  favor  of  the 
prohibitory  law. 


APPENDIX.  167 

Q.  You  say  when  the  prohibitory  law  came  into  operation  it  led  to  the 
cessation  of  religious  efforts  ? 

A.     It  did,  certainly. 

Q.     About  what  time  did  that  occur  ? 

A.  I  am  not  well  informed  as  regards  dates  and  should  not  be  able  to  say 
as  to  the  year.  It  was  after  the  thing  had  had  a  full  trial. 

Q.     Have  you  not  some  idea  about  the  date  ? 

A.  If  you  will  tell  me  when  this  legislation  began  I  can  tell  you  in  about 
how  many  years  it  began  to  have  that  effect. 

Q.     You  recollect  how  the  state  of  things  was  twenty  years  ago  ? 

A.  I  think  we  were  under  the  regimen  of  the  old  Massachusetts  Temper- 
ance Society  then  which  comprised  the  very  best  sort  of  men  as  we  all  know 
in  Massachusetts.  I  remember  reading  their  debates  in  this  hall  with  unspeak- 
able interest.  There  was  temperance  regulating  the  whole  thing.  It  was  not 
fanatical.  It  took  a  common  sense  and  scriptural  view  of  the  whole  subject, 
and  I  have  always  been  of  the  opinion  that  if  that  state  of  things  had  been 
permitted  to  continue  there  would  have  been  a  better  state  of  things  as 
regards  temperance  at  the  present  day  ;  but  it  immediately  fell  into  the  hands 
of  zealous  men  who  I  think  departed  from  the  principles  of  the  word  of  God. 

Q.  Was  not  this  operation  of  the  Massachusetts  Society  a  good  deal  more 
than  twenty  years  ago  ? 

A.     I  forget.     I  have  not  the  date  in  mind. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  anything  of  the  influence  of  the  Washingtonian 
reform  upon  the  ministers  engaged  in  the  discussion  of  this  subject,  preach- 
ing sermons  upon  it  ? 

A.  We  all  hailed  that  Washingtonian  movement  with  great  pleasure. 
When  it  began,  to  see  men  that  were  in  the  depths  of  degradation  rescued 
and  appearing  before  their  fellow  men  to  speak  in  favor  of  temperance,  was 
hailed  with  acclamation ;  but  the  thing  very  soon  degenerated  and  we 
abandoned  it.  It  was  liable  to  abuse  and  it  seemed  to  wear  itself  out. 

Q.     Did  not  they  drive  the  clergy  out  of  the  field  ? 

A.    No,  sir.    .They  have  too  much  sense  for  that. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  many  temperance  sermons  in  Boston  within  a  year  or 
two  or  preached  them  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  should  be  afraid  to  preach  in  Boston  on  the  present  state 
of  the  subject.  They  would  call  me  "  old  fogy"  and  "behind  the  age,"  and 
say,  "  You  know  nothing  about  it."  A  man  would  injure  his  reputation  as  a 
moral  man  to  preach  on  temperance  unless  he  went  fully  into  these  measures. 
We  have  endeavored,  some  of  us  to  plant  ourselves  on  what  we  consider  the 
word  of  God  and  believe  that  his  way  of  legislation  is  our  rule,  and  that  the 
foolishness  of  God  is  wiser  than  man  and  the  weakness  of  God  is  stronger 
than  man. 

Q.     This  fear  to  preach  or  unwillingness 

A .  It  is  not  fear.  Do  not  ascribe  it  to  fear,  but  a  failure  to  do  good ;  afraid 
for  that  reason  :  that  we  should  not  do  good,  but  rather  harm. 

Q.     Did  not  that  commence  directly  after  the  Washingtonian  reform  ? 

A.  I  am  not  able  to  synchronize  the  two  things.  It  is  in  consequence  of 
the  fact  of  this  prohibitory  legislation. 


168  APPENDIX. 

Q.  I  will  ask  you  if  you  have  preached  a  temperance  sermon,  for  twenty 
years,  to  your  congregation  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  preached  a  sermon  within  three  years  on  this  subject :  a 
dissuasive  from  strong  drink  in  trouble. 

Q.  Did  you,  previous  to  that  for  twenty  years,  preach  what  would  be 
called  temperance  sermons  ?  Twenty-five  years  ago  they  were  very 
common. 

A.  I  preach  temperance  sermons  every  Sabbath ;  but  I  do  not  preach  total 
abstinence  sermons,  because  I  do  not  believe  in  the  doctrine. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  JOHN  E.  TODD. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     You  are  a  pastor  of  what  church  ? 

A.     The  Central  Congregational  Church. 

Q.     What  denomination  ? 

A.     Trinitarian  Congregational. 

Q,     How  long  have  you  been  in  Boston  as  its  pastor  ? 

A.     A  little  over  seven  years. 

Q.  So  far  as  you  have  formed  an  opinion  within  the  circle  of  your  own 
observation  and  sphere  of  labor,  what  is  the  effect  of  the  present  prohibitory 
law  in  promoting  temperance  or  restraining  the  excessive  use  of  liquor  ? 

A.  My  observation  has  led  me  to  believe  that  there  never  was  more  drink- 
ing and  drunkenness  in  the  city  than  now ;  that  it  is  on  the  increase.  I  think 
the  prohibitory  law  has  failed  thus  far  to  prevent  intemperance,  and  that  a 
stringent  and  wise  license  law  would  probably  restrain  the  sale  and  use  of 
liquor  more  than  the  present  law  ? 

Q.  As  to  the  effect  of  this  system  of  legislation  and  mode  of  procedure 
under  it  in  withholding  the  clergy  and  others  from  active  co-operation  ? 

A.  I  think  the  clergy  and  the  Christian  people  of  the  Commonwealth  have 
been  deterred  and  disheartened  a  great  deal  by  the  course  which  has  been 
pursued  by  some  of  the  most  active  temperance  people.  The  measures  they 
have  forced  upon  the  people,  and  especially  the  spirit  which  has  animated 
them,  has  brought  that  about.  I  do  not  think  a  change  of  the  present  law 
would  entirely  remove  the  present  state  of  things ;  but  if  we  could  feel  that 
the  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts  has  rebuked  the  extreme  measures  and 
extreme  spirit  of  some  temperance  people,  we  who  are  in  favor  of  temperance 
would  feel  more  encouraged  to  take  up  the  cause  and  push  it  to  the  extent  of 
our  abilities  and  influence. 

Q.  What  is  the  opinion  of  those  within  whose  circle  you  move  on  this  same 
subject  ? 

A.  I  have  not  had  any  conversation  with  many  of  them  on  the  subject. 
If  I  may  judge  from  the  prevalence  of  the  use  of  liquors,  I  think  the  general 
opinion  is  that  liquors  ought  to  be  sold  or  at  least  purchased. 

Q.  How  as  to  the  opinion  of  the  officers  and  members  of  your  church 
on  this  subject  ? 

A.  The  general  practice  leads  me  to  believe  they  are  not  in  favor  of  entire 
prohibition. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONEH.)  You  think  there  is  more  intemperance  than  sinco 
you  have  resided  in  Boston  ? 


APPENDIX.  169 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  did  you  say  you  had  been  here  ? 

A.     Only  seven  years. 

Q.   •  You  came  here  a  little  before  the  -war  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  the  effect  of  war  is  almost  necessarily  to  promote 
intemperance  ? 

A.  It  is  to  some  extent;  but  I  think  the  influence  of  the  war  upon  my 
people  was  to  produce  a  healthier  tone  of  moral  sentiment  among  them. 

Q.     Take  the  world  at  large  ? 

A.     I  think  war  may  have  that  effect  generally. 

Q.     What  do  you  define  as  temperance  ? 

A.  I  should  be  very  glad  to  have  the  sale  and  use  of  intoxicating  liquors 
entirely  cease.  That  would  conform  with  my  belief  and  practice.  How  far 
it  is  best  to  attempt  this  by  force  is  another  question.  I  do  not  think  it  is  expe- 
dient or  practicable  to  enforce  a  prohibitory  law  in  a  community  where  the 
prevailing  sentiment  of  the  people  is  against  it. 

Q.     You  say  your  opinion  is  in  favor  of  abstinence  ? 

A.  Entire  abstinence  from  intoxicating  liquors  of  all  kind.  I  am  aware 
that  among  a  certain  class  an  opposite  opinion  has  prevailed.  It  was  owing 
to  a  misapprehension  of  some  words  I  let  fall  once.  I  am  always  in  favor  of 
total  abstinence.  The  misunderstanding  that  arose  came  from  the  fact  that  I 
deprecated  the  attempt  to  force  upon  ministers  the  necessity  that  the  use  of 
liquors  is  at  all  times  a  sin.  I  was  not  willing  to  do  it.  I  do  not  believe  it  is 
the  gospel. 

Q.  You  think  a  license  law  would  Jje  an  improvement  upon  the  present 
law,  because  you  think  the  present  law  is  not  sustained  by  public  opinion  ? 

A.  I  think  a  stringent  license  law  might  be  devised  that  would  restrain 
the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  more  than  the  present  law. 

Q. '   Your  objection  is  that  it  is  not  sustained  ? 

A.  That  it  is  not  sustained.  The  present  benefit  I  should  hope  from  a 
license  law  is  that  it  would  encourage  Christian  people  to  put  forth  more 
moral  influence. 

Q.  What  e  Sect  would  it  have  to  make  them  bring  moral  and  religious 
influence  to  be<ir  ? 

A.  Under  the  present  state  of  things  all  that  preach  total  abstinence,  are 
classed  with  certain  individuals  who  think  it  is  always,  under  all  circumstan- 
ces, a  sin  to  ure,  sell  or  manufacture  liquors.  If  we  undertake  to  preach  tem- 
perance we  are  classed  with  these  individuals.  If  we  can  feel  that  the  State 
takes  different  and  more  moderate  views,  we  shall  be  encouraged  and  feel  that 
we  have  the  balance  of  community  on  our  side. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  there  is  a, great  deal  of  activity  in  the  temperance 
cause,  aside  from  the  law  ;  sermons  preached,  societies  gotten  up  and  pledges 
taken ;  more  so  than  in  any  time  in  your  experience  ? 

A.  Perhaps  within  my  experience  as  a  pastor,  but  certainly  not  within 
my  memory.  The  majority  of  the  ministers  are  not  so  active  as  they  were  a 
few  years  ago. 

Q.     How  long  ago  ? 
22 


170  APPENDIX. 

A.     Ten  or  fifteen  years. 

Q.     That  was  during  the  existence  of  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A .     Within  the  time  since  these  measures  commenced. 

Q.     What  sort  of  license  law  would  you  have  ? 

A.  I  have  not  given  the  subject,  which  is  a  delicate  one,  sufficient  thought 
to  enable  me  to  go  into  all  the  provisions  accurately.  I  would  not  have  any 
license  law  which  "would  re-open  the  sale  where  it  has  ceased.  I  should  think 
it  tyrannous  to  impose  a  grog-shop  upon  a  community  which  that  community 
did  not  want.  I  should  want  a  license  law  that  would  give  a  town  power 
to  determine  whether  it  would  permit  the  sale  or  not ;  and  I  should  want  a 
license  so  large,  that  all  the  licensed  would  be  interested  in  suppressing  the 
sale  by  unlicensed  parties. 

Q.  You  want  any  city  or  town  to  have  the  privilege  of  excluding  or  per- 
mitting it  as  they  saw  fit  ? 

A.     I  think  that  would  be  wise. 

Q.  Suppose  there  was  a  system  of  license,  and  the  city  of  Boston  under  it 
should  vote  to  have  no  licenses  granted,  and  the  city  of  Charlestown  should 
open  a  large  number  of  licensed  places,  would  that  be  fair  to  the  city  of  Bos- 
ton, where  the  people  can  all  go  over  there  and  get  it,  drawing  people  from 
their  homes  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  it  would  be  a  good  thing,  but  better  than  to  have  the 
same  shops  open  in  every  street  in  the  city. 

Q.     Do  you  not  think  uniformity  is  important  ? 

A.    Where  it  is  practicable. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  many  arrests  for  adultery  there  have  been  in  the 
city  the  last  year  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Because  there  are  only  ten  or  twenty, — I  believe  there  are  a  great 
many  more,  and  that  crime  is  hardly  to  any  extent  suppressed  by  a  law, — 
would  you  take  off  the  sanction  of  the  law  because  it  is  not  enforced,  or 
would  you  have  the  law  express  the  truth  of  the  matter,  and  say  it  was  a 
great  sin  ? 

A.  I  do  not  recognize  the  cases  as  parallel;  adultery  and  polygamy  are 
admitted  by  the  conscience  of  the  whole  world  or  of  all  civilized  nations  to 
be  sins.  The  sale  and  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  is  a  question  yet  undecided, 
because  a  large  portion  of  the  civilized  world  do  not  think  there  is  any  sin  in 
it.  Until  the  conscience  of  the  world  is  further  enlightened,  we  cannot  put 
the  two  things  on  the  same  basis. 

Q,    You  think  the  conscience  of  the  world  is  against  polygamy? 

A.    All  of  the  civilized  world. 

TESTIMONY  OF  II.  F.  FRENCH. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  have  been  connected  with  the  office  of 
prosecuting  attorney  in  Boston  ? 

A.  I  was  assistant  district-attorney  for  two  or  three  years,  ending  a  year 
ago. 

Q.  State  your  opinion  as  to  the  practicability  and  difficulties  of  enforcing 
this  law. 


APPENDIX.  171 

A.  The  indictments  that  were  tried  in  the  court  while  I  was  connected 
with  it  were  under  the  nuisance  clause  almost  entirely. 

Q.  As  to  the  effect  of  the  prosecutions  that  were  made  in  checking  the 
sale  and  use  of  liquor  ? 

A.  There  was  no  difficulty  in  procuring  convictions  under  those  indict- 
ments that  I  remember.  There  were  very  few  if  any  indictments  for  selling. 
The  indictments  were  for  maintaining  places  for  the  illegal  keeping  and  sale 
of  ardent  spirits  and  spirituous  liquors.  My  observation  would  not  be  worth 
much  of  itself.  My  impression  from  what  I  have  heard  is  that  the  sale  has 
gone  on  and  almost  everybody  has  sold  that  chose  to ;  it  has  not  been  sup- 
pressed in  this  city  to  any  extent.  A  great  many  places  were  shut  up,  but 
others  appeared  and  the  number  seemed  to  be  indefinite. 

Q.  There  was  no  penalty  connected  with  that  portion  of  the  law,  of 
imprisonment  ? 

A.  As  I  understand  it,  it  is  fine  or  imprisonment  at  the  discretion  of  the 
court,  whereas  under  the  other  part  of  the  statute,  for  selling,  the  penalty  is 
fine  and  imprisonment.  The  court  must  impose  some  imprisonment  with  the 
fine,  certainly  for  the  second  and  third  offence ;  a  longer  period  for  each 
prosecution. 

Q.  Have  you  formed  any  opinion  of  the  comparative  value  as  between  the 
present  system  and  a  proper  system  of  regulation  ? 

A.  I  had  a  much  longer  observation  in  New  Hampshire  where  I  was 
prosecuting  officer  for  ten  years  and  upon  the  bench  four  or  five  years,  than 
in  Massachusetts.  My  impression  is  that  in  either  State  the  sale  of  liquor  may 
be  prevented  in  country  towns  under  either  system  ;  that  you  may  substan- 
tially stop  the  sale  in  the  small  towns.  In  the  cities  you  cannot  under  any 
system ;  there  will  be  liquor  consumed  in  a  city  like  Boston  in  spite  of 
legislation. 

Q.  Taking  public  sentiment  into  consideration  which  system  in  your 
opinion  would  be  most  beneficial  in  Boston  ? 

A.  My  impression  would  be  that  in  a  large  city  like  Boston,  where  I 
assume  that  you  cannot  stop  the  sale  of  liquor,  it  would  be  better  to  regulate 
it  and  put  it  into  the  hands  of  persons  who  might  be  held  responsible,  and 
where  the  quality  of  the  liquor  might  be  tested  so  they  should  not  sell  an 
unusually  poisonous  article. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Did  you  ever  suppose  while  making  these  efforts 
to  execute  the  law  that  you  had  the  weight  of  the  influence  of  the  city 
authorities  to  aid  you  ? 

A.  We  had  never  any  difficulty  in  executing  the  law  as  far  as  we 
executed  it. 

Q.     You  brought  the  cases  under  the  Nuisance  Act  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  feel  that  there  was  a  determination,  an  honest,  genuine 
purpose  on  the  part  of  the  city  authorities,  to  execute  the  law  for  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  traffic  ? 

A.  I  had  no  means  of  forming  an  opinion.  The  cases  came  through  the 
police  exclusively,  and  were  supported  ordinarily  by  the  testimony  of  the 


172  APPENDIX. 

police  and  were  entirely  clear,  and  almost  every  one  of  them  ended  in  a 
conviction. 

TESTIMONY  OF  Hox.  JOHN  C.  PARK. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Have  you  been  connected  with  the  office  of 
prosecuting  officer  in  Boston  ? 

A.    In  1851-2-3. 

Q.    You  are  a  practising  lawyer  in  Boston  now  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Y.  I  will  ask  you  to  state  any  opinion  you  have  in  reference  to  this 
subject  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  what  the  testimony  has  been,  as  I  have  not  read  any  of 
it.  I  wish  to  call  the  attention  of  the  Committee  to  one  matter  entirely  separate 
from  the  questions  I  have  heard  answered  here.  It  is  the  effect  of  this  law  in 
an  entirely  different  line  of  matters  ;  and  to  illustrate  this  effect,  I  will  state  a 
case  which  took  place  sometime  ago,  and  in  which  I  was  counsel.  Thomas 
Adams,  then  sheriff  of  Norfolk  County,  attached,  as  his  duty  was,  as  an  officer, 
certain  property  pointed  out  to  him.  (The  law  is  that  the  officer  shall  attach 
the  property  pointed  out  to  him.)  He  attached  the  stock  of  a  retail  seller 
of  liquor,  advertised  it  for  sale,  and  sold  it.  The  man  who  owned  the  liquor 
complained  of  him  before  a  police  magistrate  in  Norfolk  County  for  selling 
liquor  contrary  to  law,  and  he  was  found  guilty,  although  he  set  up  in  defence 
that  he  acted  according  to  his  duty,  and  he  was  sentenced  to  Dedham  jail.  I 
brought  a  writ  of  habeas  corpus  and  brought  it  before  the  Supreme  Court, 
and  the  Supreme  Court  decided  that  he  had  no  right  to  sell ;  that  he  was 
amenable  to  the  punishment  and  ought  to  go  to  jail.  It  so  happened  that  the 
magistrate  had  sentenced  him  to  Dedham  jail  and  Sheriff  Thomas  was  the 
keeper  of  the  jail.  He  had  got  to  shut  himself  in  and  lock  himself  in.  Under 
these  circumstances,  the  Supreme  Court  ordered  him  to  be  discharged.  The 
result  of  that  went  further,  and  put  to  the  Supreme  Court  the  question  whether 
an  executor  or  administrator  can  make  an  inventory  of  the  estate  of  a 
deceased ;  and  that  question  has  recently  come  up  before  the  court  in  another 
form  in  which  a  part  of  the  Supreme  Court  have  settled,  that  a  man  may  owe 
for  the  necessaries  of  life,  if  you  please,  for  the  board  of  his  family  or  the 
clothing  of  his  children  and  may  be  sued ;  and,  if  he  has  no  property  but 
liquors,  if  he  has  twenty  thousand  dollars'  worth  of  liquors,  he  can  take  the 
poor  debtor's  oath  and  can  swear  "  I  have  not  got  property  liable  to  attach- 
ment;" for  the  oath  is  that  I  have  "  no  property  exceeding  twenty  dollars  in 
value  but  what  is  exempt  from  attachment."  That  is  the  present  state  of  the 
law.  The  difficulty  is,  that  when  you  legislate  for  certain  purposes  you  do  not 
see  how  it  will  affect  other  purposes.  Take  the  case  of  executors  and  admin- 
istators.  Here  is  a  man  who  dies  and  leaves  little  children,  and  property  in 
liquors.  How  can  the  executor  inventory  and  charge  himself  with  so  much  of 
value  ?  It  is  not  what  he  can  sell,  for  the  law  says  he  cannot  sell  it.  Suppose  it 
to  be  a  gentleman  who,  in  his  own  private  cellar,  has  what  the  law  allows  him 
to  have,  and  he  dies ;  what  are  you  going  to  do  with  that  ?  The  administrator 
cannot  make  an  inventory,  because  he  cannot  sell  it.  I  point  out  these 
difficulties  to  show  the  operation  of  this  law  in  another  direction.  Legislating 


APPENDIX.  173 

sometimes  with  a  view  to  a  particular  great  object  that  we  have  in  view,  the 
other  operations  of  the  law  do  not  occur  to  us.  The  Supreme  Court,  when 
this  question  came  before  them,  observed  that  the  law  was  odd,  and  that  its 
operation  had  not  been  foreseen ;  and,  according  to  the  decision  lately  given 
lay  Judge  Hoar,  an  officer  cannot  attach  such  property  at  all :  that  liquor  is 
exempt  by  law  from  being  attached  for  debt,  because,  it  cannot  be  sold  by  the 
officer. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  What  is  there  in  the  law  to  prevent  a  person,  in 
anticipation  of  insolvency,  from  putting  his  money  in  liquor  and  thus  getting 
rid  of  paying  his  creditor  ? 

A.  It  can  be  done.  I  drafted  a  law  and  brought  it  up  in  the  House,  that 
sheriffs,  executors,  and  administrators,  those  having  these  things  coming  into 
their  hands  by  legal  processes,  should  have  a  right  to  sell  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  There  was  such  a  law  enforced  for  some  years, 
and  then  repealed,  was  there  not  ? 

A.  While  District- Attorney,  I  formed  the  opinion,  (and  it  is  not  a 
mere  matter  of  opinion,  but  is  confirmed  by  every  hour  of  experience  since,) 
that  ninety-nine  one-hundredths  of  the  crime  in  the  Commonwealth  is  pro- 
duced by  intoxicating  liquors ;  but  the  difficulty  is,  it  has  increased.  The 
sale  and  use  of  intoxicating  liquor  has  alarmingly  increased,  and  crime  has 
increased.  The  result  of  this  law  has  been  a  demoralization  of  the  public 
mind  very  much  in  relation  to  obedience  to  the  law  of  the  land.  Once  get 
the  public  to  the  idea  that  such  a  law  ought  to  be  violated,  and  the  public 
mind  is  demoralized  by  it.  It  has  been  so  in  this  community.  The  same 
legislation  has  had  the  effect  to  demoralize  jurymen's  minjds  under  the  Nui- 
sance Law.  There  were  indictments  under  the  Nuisance  Law.  That  statute 
declares,  that  a  place  being  proved  to  be  a  place  where  intoxicating  liquor  is 
sold,  notwithstanding  that  it  is  a  place  of  perfect  order,  there  being  no  proof 
that  it  hurts  a  living  being,  that  it  produces  disorder,  crime,  or  trouble,  is  a 
nuisance ;  and  you  call  upon  juries  to  go  out  and  find,  and  they  are  told,  if 
you  find  these  facts,  you  must  declare  it  to  be  a  nuisance.  The  jury  says,  I 
am  not  satisfied  it  is  a  nuisance.  I  will  not  say  a  thing  is  black  when  it  is 
white,  because  the  legislature  say  it  is  black.  I  see  it  white,  and  do  not  be- 
lieve it  is  black.  They  would  go  out  and  reason  in  the  jury-room,  and  say, 
The  legislature  cannot  legislate  that  I,  upon  oath,  shall  say  a  thing  is  different 
from  what  it  is.  It  operated  badly  upon  the  effect  of  the  legislation ;  that  I 
found  to  be  the  fact  by  conversation  with  juries.  There  is  another  serious 
difficulty,  and  that  is  this :  the  whole  matter  is  now  done  in  ways  of  conceal- 
ment and  secresy.  The  law  is  evaded  in  every  possible  shape  and  way,  and, 
as  is  testified  by  Catholic  clergymen,  instead  of  men  walking  up  to  the  counter 
and  drinking,  they  take  it  to  their  homes,  and  the  wives  and  children  and 
people  at  home  get  at  it,  when  they  would  not  otherwise  get  at  it.  It  is 
spreading  among  the  women  and  children,  and  a  great  deal  more  is  used, 
because,  instead  of  going  to  a  bar  and  drinking,  they  now  take  it  home,  and 
there  is  more  tippling  at  home ;  for  a  man  who  does  not  have  a  dealer  to 
watch  him  and  see  that  he  does  not  take  more  than  he  has  paid  for,  will  take 
a  larger  glass.  I  will  tell  you  what  I  think  the  city  of  Boston  might  be.  If 
you  have  your  licensed  places,  the  moment  you  have  them,  those  that  are 


174  APPENDIX. 

licensed  will  do  all  they  can  to  suppress  the  other  small  tippling-shops.  Your 
licensed  places  should  not  be  permitted  to  be  behind  screens.  They  should  be 
open  to  the  public,  so  the  public  eye  can  see  ;  and  your  young  men,  who  now 
go  into  back  rooms  to  drink,  could  do  so  no  longer.  Your  licenses  would  be 
taken  away  from  men  who  did  not  keep  open  places.  Any  one  who  goes  up  to 
the  bar  and  drinks  must  be  seen  by  everybody — by  his  mother  and  his  sister,  if 
they  happen  to  be  passing  by.  In  addition  to  that,  give  these  licenses,  and 
your  police  officers,  instead  of  being  disguised,  would  be  right  in  the  room. 
The  landlord  would  not  undertake  to  prevent  them,  and  would  not  desire  to 
prevent  them.  They  could  walk  up  to  the  bar  say,  "  Don't  sell  to  that  man, 
he  has  been  convicted  as  a  common  drunkard,"  or,  "  He  is  intoxicated,"  and 
he  would  be  obeyed.  Your  police  would  come  directly  in  contact  with  these 
men  openly  and  above  board,  instead  of  doing  as  they  do  now,  going  in  dif- 
ferent uniforms  and  sitting  round.  In  this  way,  the  whole  of  this  matter 
would  be  open  and  above  board,  and  under  proper  control.  I  am  old  enough 
to  recollect  the  days  in  which  it  was  the  law  of  the  land  that  any  person 
connected  with  a  family — a  wife  that  knew  that  her  husband  was  in  the  habit 
of  spending  his  earnings  for  liquor,  instead  of  properly  providing  for  the 
support  of  his  family,  for  instance — could  give  warning  to  dealers  and  pre- 
vent its  being  sold  to  him.  I  recollect  of  seeing  over  the  mantel-piece,  in 
places  where  liquors  were  sold,  notices  that  such  and  such  persons  could  not 
be  trusted.  That  same  thing  could  be  used  with  great  power  and  force  the 
moment  you  pass  that  law.  Have  the  licensed  men  understand  that  is  to  be 
enforced.  The  policemen  would  be  at  liberty  to  go  in.  They  could  see  how 
the  law  was  obeyed  in  that  particular.  They  would  warn  a  man,  and  say, 
"  Your  license  will  be  revoked  or  suspended."  The  licenses  should  be  sus- 
pended as  well  as  revoked.  If  you  put  on  heavy  license,  and  a  man  violates 
the  law  in  some  slight  particular,  and  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen  revoke  the 
license,  a  great  ado  would  be  made,  and  people  would  say,  "  It  is  too  slight  a 
thing  to  cause  the  loss  of  a  man's  license."  Let  the  policeman  walk  up  to  the 
dealer  and  say,  "  You  are  violating  your  license :  you  are  selling  to  a  minor, 
to  a  boy,  to  somebody  who  has  drank  too  much,  to  somebody  who  has  been 
punished  for  it,  to  a  man  who  is  spending  his  money  in  drink,  instead  of 
using  his  earnings  to  support  his  wife  and  children,"  or  any  of  these  things. 
The  police  force  would  walk  up  and  say,  "  You  are  thus  violating  the  law ; 
we  shall  report  you,  and  your  license  will  be  taken  away."  Do  not  gentle- 
men believe  that  if  such  a  law  could  be  put  into  operation,  it  would  be  pro- 
ductive of  a  different  state  of  things  ?  I  know  that  some  gentlemen  think 
that  nothing  short  of  absolute  prohibition  will  do  it.  I  think  not.  I  think 
that  this  thing  will  be  done  covertly  and  secretly,  and  in  the  deleterious  way 
in  which  it  is  now.  I  should  also  have  the  authority  given  to  these  very 
police  officers  to  walk  up  and  say,  "  I  want  to  see  that  glass  of  liquor.  I  am 
going  to  take  it  to  be  analyzed.  You  have  been  selling  poisons,  not  liquor." 
Our  grandfathers  did  not  drink  this  kind  of  stuff.  My  ancestors,  who  lived 
to  be  seventy,  eighty  or  ninety  years  old,  every  one  of  them — good  old 
Scotch  Covenanters — took  their  regular  drink  of  good  old  Jamaica  rum. 
We  have  a  statute  that  is  a  dead  letter :  "  Whoever  knowingly  sells  any  kind 
of  diseased,  corrupt,  or  unwholsome  provision,  whether  meat  or  drink," — I 


APPENDIX.  175 

do  not  believe  nine  men  out  of  ten  -know  that  that  -word  "  drink  "  is  there — 
"  without  making  the  same  fully  known  to  the  buyer,  shall  be  punished  by 
imprisonment  in  the  jail."  Go  down  to  Ann  Street,  and  when  a  man  walks 
up  to  get  a  drink,  you  say,  "  That  is  rot-gut,"  and  still,  I  have  no  doubt  he 
would  buy  it  and  drink  it.  Still,  the  law  of  the  land  is,  if  he  sells  without 
telling  what  it  is,  you  can  convict  him.  One  of  the  great  troubles  of  the 
present  day  is,  the  stuff  that  is  sold  for  liquor.  They  bring  up  in  the  Police 
Court  every  day  people  who  have  not  the  face  God  gave  them,  or  anything 
like  it.  It  is  not  the  result  of  drinking  good  liquor,  but  this  stuff  that  drives 
them  crazy.  They  want  it,  and  get  it,  for  the  very  fact  that  it  is  intoxicating 
and  makes  them  crazy.  Get  a  system  of  license,  with  the  right  to  seize  and 
analyze,  and  you  alter  all  that.  These  are  my  views  in  relation  to  what 
might  be  done.  I  agree  with  the  gentleman  I  have  heard  speak  in  relation 
to  the  matter  of  not  putting  it  upon  any  country  town  that  does  not  want  it. 
If  a  country  town  has  excluded  it,  I  do  not  see  why  it  should  be  forced 
upon  it. 

Q.     Should  not  the  laws  be  uniform? 

A.  In  regard  to  the  supposition  of  the  cities  of  Charlestown  and  Boston 
being  different,  I  cannot  suppose  such  a  thing  would  take  place,  but  I  believe, 
in  your  small  country  towns,  the  establishment  of  places  for  the  sale  of  liquor 
would  be  likely  to  induce  country  farmers  to  leave  their  quiet  homes  and  go 
down  to  them  and  spend  their  evenings.  Let  them  have  the  right  to  exclude 
such  places  if  they  see  fit.  In  the  city  of  Boston  we  must  take  things  as  we 
find  them,  and  you  have  driven  liquor-selling  not  to  places  where  it  can  be 
regulated,  but  into  places  where  it  is  hidden  and  cannot  be  reached,  and  the 
people  come  up  day  after  day  worse  intoxicated  and  the  crime  has  spread. 
Here  is  a  collateral  matter  which  shows  the  effect  of  it.  In  the  days  of  Josiah 
Quincy  there  was  a  part  of  Boston  called  Nigger  Hill,  in  which  the  brothels 
of  Boston  were  congregated.  Mr.  Quincy  determined  to  break  these  places 
up,  and  he  went  to  work  and  he  did  it.  All  these  places  were  broken  up  and 
the  result  was  they  were  scattered  all  over  the  city  of  Boston,  and  you  could 
not  tell  where  to  look  for  them.  The  people  that  wanted  them  found  them, 
but  instead  of  being  kept  in  one  location  they  were  scattered  all  over  Boston. 
Now  it  is  just  so  in  relation  to  this  matter.  You  have  scattered  it  so  that  now 
there  is  no  place,  where  a  man  goes  out  to  do  his  day's  work,  that  his  wife 
does  not  get  a  jug  and  set  up  a  tippling  shop  on  a  small  scale.  I  therefore 
want  a  license  system  so  regulated  in  Boston  that  it  shall  be  directly  under 
the  surveillance  of  a  spirited,  active,  and  intrepid  police.  I  am  satisfied  that 
either  Colonel  Kurtz  or  Major  Jones  would  carry  into  effect  any  such  law, 
provided  men  would  come  in  and  point  out  the  course  for  procedure. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  say  there  is  more  intemperance  than  ever 
before  ;  you  say  there  is  more  sold  and  drank  than  ever  before  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     On  Avhat  fact  do  you  base  that  ? 

A.  On  the  fact  of  my  every  day  experience.  I  can  recollect  when  you 
saw  but  very  little  comparatively  of  this  terrible  drunkenness.  Occasionally 
you  would  see  a  sailor  just  returned  from  a  voyage  •  drunk.  Now  we  take 
little  notice  of  a  drunken  man  and  you  see  men  in  our  police  court-room  in  a 


176  APPENDIX. 

state  not  to  be  described.  It  is  terrible  to  see  how  completely  God's  image 
is  washed  out  from  the  faces  of  these  people.  In  those  days  people  might 
drink  as  much  but  they  did  not  drink  such  stuff. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  there  is  as  much  liquor  drank  in  this  country  as  there 
•was  forty  years  ago  ? 

A.  I  am  not  so  well  acquainted  with  this  country  as  some  people.  I  never 
was  in  Washington  in  my  life.  I  was  never  farther  east  than  Bangor,  nor 
farther  north  than  St.  Johnsbury. 

Q.     Are  you  familiar  with  the  statistics  of  the  manufacture  and  sale  ? 

A.     I  am  not ;  I  do  not  drink,  buy  or  sell. 

Q.  Should  you  be  surprised  if  I  should  say  there  is  only  about  one-third  as 
much  drank  as  there  was  forty  years  ago  ? 

A.  I  am  not  aware  of  the  fact.  If  that  is  the  fact,  I  did  not  know  it.  I 
I  know  what  I  see. 

Mr.  SPOONER.     The  statistics  show. 

Mr.  PARK.     Do  they  show  it  to  be  so  in  Massachusetts  ? 

Mr.  SPOOXER.  I  can  show  you  the  statistics  of  that.  Have  the  places 
increased  ? 

A.    I  should  think  they  had  immensely. 

Q.     Since  when  V 

A.  All  the  time  kept  increasing.  It  is  stated  that  so-and-so  has  signified 
an  intention  of  giving  up  the  sale.  So  the  number  may  have  decreased,  but 
I  doubt  the  sincerity  of  the  parties  who  say  so. 

Q.  You  recollect  that  when  James  T.  Austin  was  district-attorney,  the 
population  of  Boston  was  about  fifty-five  thousand.  What  is  it  now  ? 

A.     Between  three  and  four  times  that. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  that  he  reported  that  under  the  license  law  six  hun- 
dred were  licensed  and  three  hundred  sold  without  license  ? 

A.     I  do  not  recollect  it. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  Colonel  Kurtz,  who  has  one  motive  to  make  the 
number  as  large  as  possible,  reports  about  fifteen  hundred  places  of  sale  for  a 
population  of  250,000  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  it.  The  reports  are  made  by  people  who  are  interested 
in  making  them  one  way  or  another.  I  do  not  give  much  credence  to  them. 
I  see  what  I  know  that  liquor  shops  are  more  in  the  streets,  and  I  see  more 
and  more  drunkenness  rampant  in  the  streets. 

Q.     You  live  in  Roxbury  ? 

A.     I  do.     I  am  in  the  city  of  Boston  very  little  in  the  evenings  indeed. 

Q.     Where  are  your  walks  except  on  the  direct  route  ? 

A.     Very  little,  except  when  I  am  called  out  of  my  office  on  business. 

Q.     Do  you  go  down  to  Ann  Street  or  North  Street  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Fort  Hill,  South  Boston  and  the  North  End,  and  the  South 
End. 

Q.    You  know  the  city  has  been  opposed  to  the  State  Police  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know. 

Q.    Have  you  read  the  report  of  the  Chief  of  Police  ? 


APPENDIX.  177 

A.  I  read  Major  Jones'  report.  He  was  kind  enough  to  send  me  one.  I 
have  perfect  confidence  he  will  do  everything  he  can  to  maintain  the  law. 
So  I  have  for  Colonel  Kurtz. 

Q.  You  say  that  it  is  better  for  the  grog-shops  to  be  open  and  exposed 
than  to  have  these  places  in  secret.  Do  you  suppose  it  is  possible  to  have 
these  open  grog-shops  and  not  at  the  same  time  have  secret  places  ? 

A.  Just  as  certain  as  there  is  a  secret  place  found  the  license  would  be 
taken  away.  What  I  propose  is  that  these  licensed  places  shall  all  be  open 
to  the  public  eye  ;  not  to  allow  them  to  have  any  private  places.  If  they 
have,  their  licenses  should  be  taken  away  and  they  be  dealt  with  with  the 
severity  of  the  law. 

Q.  I  ask  if  you  do  not  suppose  if  you  had  open  grog-shops,  that  those 
persons  who  were  ashamed  to  be  seen  in  the  open  grog-shops  would  find 
secret  places  ? 

A.  If  they  did,  the  persons  licensed  would  be  shoulder  to  shoulder  to  break 
up  those  places. 

Q.  Tell  me  if  you  ever  heard  of  licensed  parties  setting  seriously  to  work 
to  suppress  the  unlicensed  ? 

A.     In  old  times  I  knew  it  to  be  so. 

Q.     Did  they  succeed  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Suppose  I  say  the  report  of  Mr.  Austin  was  that  there  were  three 
hundred  unlicensed  dealers,  and  that  there  were  heavy  bonds  given  that  the 
licensed  parties  should  not  violate  their  licenses,  and  that  in  twelve  years 
no  party  was  ever  prosecuted  ? 

A .     Then  I  should  suppose  they  never  violated. 

Q.     How  would  a  licensed  person  aid  to  suppress  the  unlicensed  ? 

A.  He  would  furnish  the  police  with  the  testimony  although  he  would  not 
be  known  in  it.  Suppose  I  have  paid  a  heavy  sum  for  a  license.  I  have 
men  all  round  me  selling  away  my  custom.  I  tell  the  police  of  it  and  they 
will  prosecute. 

Q.  Suppose  Mr.  Kurtz  says  he  could  find  indictments  against  every  man 
who  sold  in  Boston  ;  what  additional  aid  could  the  licensed  men  give  him  ? 

A.     Did  he  complain  ? 

Q.    No,  sir.     Would  he  not  under  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.     I  am  not  here  to  give  answers  about  Mr.  Kurtz. 

Q.  Is  it  not  practicable  for  three  hundred  and  seventy-five  policemen  to 
find  evidence  ? 

A.  They  find  it  to-day  and  to-morrow  it  is  gone.  It  is  like  a  globule  of 
mercury.  Put  your  finger  on  it  and  it  breaks  and  scatters  into  half  a  dozen 
fragments. 

Q.     Would  not  the  same  difficulty  exist  ? 

A.  The  licensed  men  would  all  be  looking  after  it  and  when  a  license  law 
is  established  you  will  find  public  sentiment  different.  We  are  in  a  desperate 
situation,  and  some  step  should  be  taken  to  alter  it.  It  is  well  worth  the 
experiment  of  trying. 

Q.    Have  you  read  the  police  reports  the  last  four  or  five  years  ? 
A.    No,  sir. 

23 


178  APPENDIX. 

Q.  You  heard  that  not  only  the  number  of  places  have  decreased,  but  also 
that  the  cases  of  drunkenness  have  decreased  ? 

A.  If  the  courts  say  so  I  must  take  facts  for  facts,  but  I  do  not  believe  it. 
It  has  never  been  so  bad  as  it  is  now.  I  am  sure  of  that. 

Q.     You  are  in  favor  of  open  grog-shops  ? 

A.     So  the  public  can  see  what  is  going  on  in  them. 

Q.     You  are  in  favor  of  that  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  It  is  better  you  think  that  a  man  should  go  in  and  take  a  glass  of 
liquor  openly  ? 

A.  If  we  had  the  power  it  would  be  better  to  make  every  man  in  the  city 
of  Boston  a  total  abstinence  man,  but  we  have  got  to  deal  with  society  as  we 
find  it. 

Q.  It  is  better  to  have  grog-shops  where  a  man  can  go  and  get  a  glass  of 
liquor  than  that  he  should  buy  a  larger  quantity  and  carry  it  home,  and  it  18 
better  to  have  it  open  because  less  evil  would  be  done. 

A.     Certainly,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  FAY.)  You  said,  in  the  first  of  your  examination,  that  you 
would  have  a  large  amount  paid  for  the  license  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     You  would  have  that  done  as  a  matter  of  revenue  ? 

A.  I  have  my  own  opinion  about  that.  The  State  of  Massachusetts  wants 
to  do  something  about  equalization  of  bounties.  We  do  not  want  to  tax 
ourselves  four  or  five  millions  to  do  it.  Your  little  towns  do  not  want  a 
license.  Go  to  your  country  towns  and  say,  "  We  are  going  to  license  rum, 
but  you  shall  not  have  it  in  your  town.  The  Boston  liquor-dealers  are  going 
to  pay  for  that  license.  Let  us  take  the  money  received  for  license  and  apply 
it  to  the  equalization  of  the  bounties  to  our  soldiers."  Do  you  not  think  they 
would  send  representatives  here  to  vote  for  the  license?  We  want  the 
soldiers  to  get  their  money,  but  I  know  the  people  do  not  want  to  pay  the  tax 
necessary  to  do  it.  If  we  have  got  an  evil  which  regulated  will  give  us  that 
tax,  I  do  not  think  it  will  be  any  more  dirty  if  it  goes  into  the  treasury  and 
then  to  the  soldiers,  than  if  it  was  paid  to  anybody  else,  the  superintendent 
of  schools,  if  you  please. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)  Do  you  not  know  that  that  bait  has  been  thrown 
out  to  the  people  of  Massachusetts  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  it,  but  I  am  glad  to  hear  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  I  understood  you  to  state  that  one  objection  to 
the  present  law  is,  that  it  does  not  authorize  the  officers  of  the  law,  sheriffs  or 
executors,  into  whose  hands  this  species  of  property  may  come,  to  sell  it  law- 
fully. Do  you  believe  that  that  is  a  correct  announcement  in  the  sixth  section 
of  the  law  ?  Do  you  believe  that  that  announces  the  truth  ? 

A.  I  cannot  exactly  understand  it  so.  My  definition  of  a  common  nui- 
sance is, 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  all  intoxicating  liquors  kept  for  sale  in  violation  of 
law,  are  common  nuisances  ? 

A.  Any  violation  of  the  law  is  a  public  detriment.  Whether  you  would 
call  it  a  nuisance  or  not,  is  another  thing.  If  you  ask  whether  it  is  a  detri- 
ment or  not,  I  say  yes. 


APPENDIX.  179 

Q.  My  question  is  this :  Do  you  think  that  all  intoxicating  liquors  kept  for 
sale  in  violation  of  the  law,  are  public  nuisances  ? 

A.  I  think  they  are  not  ipso  facto  common  nuisances.  I  think  that  the 
legislature  went  too  far  when  they  undertook  to  declare  it  was  a  common 
nuisance.  If  you  said  it  was  a  public  detriment,  I  should  have  said  yes ;  for 
every  evasion  of  the  law  is  a  public  detriment. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  you  would,  to-day,  make  every  man  a  total 
abstinence  man  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     You,  therefore,  believe  all  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  is  an  abuse  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Is  not  that  which  is  uniformly  injurious  a  nuisance  ? 

A.  I  would  not  say  that.  I  think  a  great  many  men  could  do  without  it. 
I  know  men  who  cannot  do  without  it. 

Q.  Is  not  the  very  definition  and  idea  of  a  common  nuisance  that  which  is 
uniformly  hurtful  ? 

A .  I  do  not  think  so.  Uniformly  hurtful  to  the  community,  not  to  the 
individual. 

Q.     Have  you  not  said  that  all  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  is  hurtful  ? 

A.     To  the  individual.     I  do  not  say  to  the  public. 

Q.     If  a  thing  is  hurtful  to  all  individuals,  is  it  not  to  the  community  ? 

A .     That  is  your  reasoning.     It  is  not  mine. 

Q.  That  is,  that  which  is  hurtful  to  everybody,  is  not  hurtful  to  the 
community  ? 

A.    It  may  be  hurtful. 

Q.  Whether  it  is  any  hardship  for  the  law  to  declare  that  that  which  is  a 
common  nuisance  shall  not  be  sold ;  and  if  that  which  is  a  common  nuisance  is 
in  the  possession  of  one  man,  and  he  can  make  no  lawful  use  of  it,  what  use 
could  his  heirs  make  of  it  if  they  should  get  it  ? 

A.     I  only  spoke  of  the  practical  effect. 

Q.  You  said  you  were  old  enough  to  remember  when  the  law  authorized 
wives  to  prevent  sales  to  their  husbands  :  do  you  not  know  that  is  part  of  this 
very  law  ? 

A.  It  may  be.  I  hope  it  will  stay  there.  The  licensed  men  will  be  very 
careful  to  observe  it.  In  regard  to  the  injurious  effect  of  the  use  of  liquor, 
Dr.  Kirkland,  of  Harvard  College,  was  accustomed  to  have  with  his  dinner 
his  glass  of  wine.  After  he  ceased  being  president  he  was  not  well  in  some 
way,  and  his  physician  told  him  he  must  abstain  entirely  from  that  glass  of 
wine.  My  father,  who  had  been  for  many  years  of  his  life  a  surgeon  and 
physician  of  some  credit,  found  that  to  be  the  fact,  and  he  told  him,  "  Mark 
my  words,  you  who  have  not  drank  to  excess  will  have  a  stroke  of  the  palsy  just 
as  sure  as  you  alter  your  course  of  living."  Dr.  Kirkland  said  he  must  obey 
the  instructions  of  his  physician,  and  before  six  months  he  had  a  stroke  of  the 
palsy.  I  say,  although  it  may  be  deleterious  to  some,  it  is  not  to  others.  As 
men  grow  older  I  think  they  require  a  little  more  stimulus. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Is  not  that  a  condition  induced  by  the  course  of 
living  ? 


180  APPENDIX. 

A.  It  may  be  ;  so  with  my  grandfathers,  that  took  it  readily.  It  may  be 
induced,  but  they  lived  to  a  good  old  age. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  HENRY  W.  PAINE. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Where  did  you  live  at  the  time  the  Maine  Law 
was  passed  in  the  State  of  Maine  ? 

A.     I  lived  in  the  State  of  Maine. 

Q.     Were  you  a  member  of  the  legislature  ? 

A.  Not  when  the  first  so-called  Maine  Law  was  passed.  I  was  a  member 
of  the  legislature  when  the  second  and  more  stringent  law  was  passed,  in 
1853, 1  think. 

Q.  As  to  the  effect  and  operation,  so  far  as  you  have  observed  it  in 
"Maine,  of  the  Maine  Law  ? 

A .  I  have  never  had  anything  to  do  with  any  attempt  to  enforce  the 
Maine  Law.  It  happened  to  me  to  be  prosecuting  officer  for  a  county  when 
the  law  of  regulation  was  in  force,  and  I  have  had  occasion  to  reflect  some  on 
ihe  subject.  I  remained  in  the  State -four  or  five  years  after  the  passage  of 
the  first  Maine  Law.  I  was  not  able  to  perceive  that  there  was  any  decrease 
of  the  use  of  spirits,  and  I  believe  such  was  the  general  remark  of  those  who 
had  better  opportunities  or  as  good  as  myself. 

Q.  So  far  as  you  have  observed  the  operation  of  things  in  Massachusetts 
what  is  the  effect  of  ours  ? 

A.  My  means  of  knowledge  are  limited.  If  you  ask  me  whether  the  law 
may  be  enforced,  I  have  no  means  of  knowing  that  it  may  not  be,  in  parti- 
cular cases.  If  you  ask  me  whether  the  law,  thus  far,  has  had  the  effect  to 
diminish  the  sale  of  ardent  spirits,  I  should  say,  from  limited  experience,  but 
from  considerable  observation,  that  it  had  not. 

Q.  That  law  was  passed  by  the  legislature.  Are  there  any  facts  within 
your  knowledge,  whether  it  was  the  embodiment  of  the  sentiment  of  the 
State  of  Maine  at  the  time  it  was  passed  ? 

A.  My  conviction  was,  it  did  not  embody  the  public  sentiment  of  the 
State  of  Maine.  It  was  unfortunately  mixed  up  with  other  issues,  and  in 
that  way,  as  it  seemed  to  me,  it  came  upon  the  statute-book.  My  conviction 
is,  if  there  were  any  real,  substantial  difficulty  in  obtaining  ardent  spirits,  this 
law  would  go  by  the  board.  It  is  because  this  law  is  practically  inefficient 
that  it  is  tolerated,  because  it  seems  to  me  that  there  is  a  very  much  prepon- 
derating opinion,  so  far  as  my  observation  has  gone,  that  the  legislature  are 
trespassing  on  private  rights :  while  the  great  mass  of  the  citizens  look 
upon  the  excessive  use  of  ardent  spirits  as  a  tremendous  evil,  they  feel  that 
the  moderate  use  is  beneficial,  and  that  when  the  State  undertook  to  restrict 
them  in  the  use  of  what  would  be  beneficial  to  them,  because  others  may  use 
the  same  thing  to  their  own  detriment  and  the  detriment  of  the  public,  they 
have  gone  farther  than  they  have  a  right  to  go  ;  that  is  the  feeling,  as  it  occurs 
to  me. 

Q.    You  have  said  in  your  opinion,  it  was  not  the  deliberate  judgment  of 
the  people  of  Maine.    Was  that  generally  understood  throughout  the  State  ? 
A.     I  think  it  was. 
Q.    What  effect  did  it  have  in  securing  respect  to  the  law  ? 


APPENDIX.  181 

A.  It  was  not  treated  with  much  respect ;  it  was  regarded  as  another  law 
passed  in  Maine,  called  the  one-dollar  law,  which  prohibited  every  man  from 
passing  or  receiving  a  one  dollar  bill ;  but,  I  believe,  everybody  that  could 
get  hold  of  one,  took  it  readily. 

Q.  If  you  have  any  opinion  upon  the  present  state  of  things  here,  as  to 
the  relative  value  of  legislation  in  checking  intemperance  between  a  license 
law  and  a  prohibitory  law,  please  state  it  ? 

A.  Nothing  further  than  the  result  of  my  own  reflections  on  the  subject. 
It  has  seemed  to  me  that  a  law  regulating  the  sale  would  be  productive  of 
good ;  whereas,  as  it  seems  to  me,  with  all  deference  to  others  of  different 
opinion,  the  present  law  is  absolutely  pernicious. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  say  the  Maine  Law  did  not,  in  your  judg- 
ment, effect  any  curtailment  of  the  use  of  intoxicating  drinks  in  Maine  ? 

A.  My  judgment  would  be,  that  there  was  not  a  gallon  of  liquor  drank 
less  by  reason  of  the  law. 

Q.     Where  did  you  live  ? 

A.     In  Hallo  well,  on  the  Kennebec  River,  two  miles  from  Augusta. 

Q.  Have  you  observed  particularly  the  statistics  of  crime  and  pauperism 
in  Portland  for  years  after  the  Maine  Law  came  into  operation  ? 

A.  I  did  partly  because  I  had  had  a  great  deal  to  do  with  enforcing 
former  liquor  laws  and  for  some  years  I  endeavored  to  inform  myself  from  all 
sources  available  as  to  the  operation  of  that  law.  The  precise  details  have 
entirely  gone  from  me  after  this  lapse  of  time. 

Q.  Do  not  you  recollect  that  the  statistics  of  crime  and  pauperism  showed 
a  decrease  of  more  than  one-half  for  a  year  or  two  ? 

A .  I  recollect  it  was  so  stated  with  great  confidence  and  also  contradicted 
with  great  confidence. 

Q.     Who  said  it  and  who  contradicted  it  ? 

A.  Upon  the  side  of  those  who  advocated  the  Maine  Law  it  was  contended 
that  it  had  the  effect  of  reducing  pauperism  and  crime,  and  statistics  were 
published  with  a  view  to  sustain  their  side,  and  on  the  other  hand  from  gentle- 
men who  had  equal  knowledge,  equal  opportunities  of  knowledge,  I  derived 
the  information  that  those  statistics  were  fabulous.  I  do  not  mean  to  say 
they  were  intentionally  erroneous  but  were  colored  by  the  imagination  of  the 
men  who  got  them  up. 

Q.  The  statistics  of  courts  are  clear  and  distinct.  They  are  not  so  affected. 
They  show  a  certain  number  of  men  convicted  of  larceny  and  other  crimes. 
Of  course  those  statistics  are  to  be  seen.  They  cannot  be  reduced. 

A.  Whether  there  are  more  or  less  convictions  in  a  given  place  at  a  given 
time  depends  not  only  on  the  number  of  offences  but  upon  the  vigilance  of 
those  who  look  after  and  prosecute  them. 

Q.  You  give  the  idea  that  the  sentiment  of  the  people  of  the  State  was 
not  in  favor  of  that  law  at  any  time,  but  that  it  was  brought  about  by  various 
circumstances  and  not  the  actual  expression  of  the  people  of  the  State  ? 

A.  That  is  my  deliberate  judgment  and  I  could  give  details  if  time 
permitted  in  support  of  that  judgment. 

Q.     How  long  ago  was  that  law  enacted  ? 

A.    My  memory  is  that  the  first  law  passed  in  Maine  by  the  two  houses 


182  APPENDIX. 

was  in  1850.  That  law  met  with  an  executive  veto.  At  the  r.ext  session  in 
1851,  a  law  was  passed  by  both  branches  and  ultimately  received  the  signa- 
ture of  the  Governor — but  living  in  the  immediate  neighborhood  I  had  no 
doubt  whatever  that  there  was  an  attempt  on  the  part  of  certain  members  o^ 
the  Legislature  to  put  the  Governor,  whom  they  wished  to  kill  off,  in  a  fix.  I 
think  that  was  one  inducing  cause.  Then  the  two  particular  parties  were 
driving  each  to  get  the  advantage  of  the  other,  and  the  Maine  Law  was  the 
stalking  horse  of  both  parties. 

Q.    Did  the  Democrats  declare  themselves  in  favor  of  the  Maine  Law  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  Nor  did  the  Whigs  as  a  party,  but  each  was  unwilling  that 
the  other  should  have  this  handle  of  addressing  itself  to  a  certain  class  of  the 
community. 

Q.     In  which  party  do  you  belong  ? 

A.     I  was  counted  as  a  Whig  in  those  times. 

Q.     Did  you  ever  belong  to  the  Republican  party  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  never. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  in  Massachusetts  ? 

A.  I  removed  from  Maine  in  1854,  but  my  business  called  me  for  the  fol- 
lowing three  or  four  years  to  Maine  the  larger  part  of  the  time  ;  so  it  is  only 
since  1858  that  I  have  resided  here. 

Q.     I  believe  the  first  law  was  passed  in  '48  or  '49  ? 

A.     The  law  that  did  not  take  effect  by  reason  of  the  Governor's  veto. 

Q.  I  think  the  law  came  into  force  in  '49  or  '50.  We  passed  ours  in  '52, 
and  that  was  induced  by  the  operation  of  that  in  Maine. 

A.     I  may  be  mistaken  about  the  dates. 

Q.  I  want  you  to  explain  this  phenomenon.  Here  is  a  law  passed  sixteen 
or  seventeen  years  ago  in  Maine,  and  it  has  been  a  matter  in  politics  every 
year.  It  still  is  on  the  statute-book.  It  has  been  contested  continually  in 
politics  and  yet  remains  there.  Is  not  that  about  as  strong  evidence  that  it  is 
an  expression  of  the  opinion  of  the  people  as  it  could  be  ? 

A.  I  think  not.  It  was  a  law  on  the  statute-book  of  England  until  the 
coming  in  of  this  century,  that  larceny  of  a  few  shillings  should  be  a  capital 
offence,  and  juries  could  not  be  found  to  convict  for  that  offence,  showing  that 
public  sentiment  was  against  it. 

Q.     Did  that  law  ever  get  into  the  politics  of  that  country  ? 

A.  Their  mode  of  conducting  political  canvasses  is  different.  Samuel 
Romilly  had  to  fight  down  a  great  deal  of  prejudice  and  bring  the  people  to 
his  assistance,  before  he  succeeded  in  repealing  this  obnoxious  provision.  The 
difficulty  in  Maine  is,  that  the  statute  stands  there  because  it  is  inoperative, 
and  people  who  desire  to  sell,  prefer  it  to  a  regulating  law. 

Q.  Are  they  not  enforcing  it  at  present  to  a  great  extent  as  far  as  you 
hear? 

A.  My  intelligence  from  there  on  this  particular  subject,  is  not  particu- 
larly recent.  I  have  not  been  in  the  State  to  stop  for  three  years,  and  it 
may  be  so.  There  have  been  spasmodic  attempts  to  enforce  that  law,  from 
time  to  time,  but  they  have  been  spasms  followed  by  no  permanent  results. 

Q.     Has  it  not  been  in  elections  ever  since  ? 

A.    I  am  not  aware  of  it. 


APPENDIX.  183 

Q.     Was  not  Governor  Smith  elected  because  of  the  revulsion  of  feeling  ? 

A.  There  has  not  been  a  governor  of  that  namo  elected  there  within 
twenty  years.  I  am  not  aware  that  any  governor  has  been  elected  in  that 
State  upon  that  issue.  I  do  recollect  that  a  gentleman  was  put  in  nomination 
for  that  office  in  Maine,  and  it  was  rumored  he  was  not  a  temperate  man, 
.and  a  temperance  man  was  put  in  nomination. 

Q.  Do  you  not  recollect  there  was  a  mob  in  Portland  where  the  military, 
by  order  of  Neal  Dow,  shot  a  man  ?  Do  you  not  recollect  that  that  got  into 
politics,  and  the  Democrats  carried  the  next  election,  and  elected  Governor 
Wells ;  and  do  you  not  recollect  that  under  Wells  the  license  law  was  enacted? 

A.  There  was  another  law  substituted  for  the  Maine  Law,  and  I  supposed, 
(and  I  think,  there  can  be  no  doubt  about  it),  the  reason  of  the  failure  of 
Governor  Wells  was  not  that  law,  but  the  fact  that  the  Legislature  had  under- 
taken to  remove  a  member  of  the  Supreme  Court,  as  the  people  thought, 
wrongfully,  and  the  Governor  acquiesced,  and  made  the  removal. 

Q.     That  carried  Wells  into  office  ? 

A.     He  was  elected  before;  that  carried  him  out. 

Q.     I  asked  if  the  consequence  of  that  mob  of  Dow's  did  not  put  him  in  ? 

A .  I  do  not  think  it  did.  I  do  not  think  that  mob  made  five  hundred  votes 
difference  in  the  vote  of  the  State  of  Maine. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  Aside  from  that,  a  license  law  was  enacted  and 
repealed  subsequently  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  we  want  to  get  at  is,  was  not  that  a  fair  expression  of  the  opinion 
of  the  people  of  Maine  ? 

A.  I  should  say  so,  if  the  question  had  been  put  nakedly  before  the  peo- 
ple ;  but  I  am  not  aware  that  it  was  ever  made  a  distinct  issue  in  Maine ;  that 
it  was  mixed  up  with  other  issues,  is  very  true. 

Q.     What  is  your  opinion  on  the  question  of  total  abstinence  ? 

A.  My  conviction  is  that  a  large  portion  of  the  community,  sensible, 
reflecting  men,  are  of  the  opinion  that  the  moderate  use  of  ardent  spirits  is 
beneficial,  and  that  every  man  ought  to  be  a  judge  for  himself  whether  it  is 
beneficial  and  proper  for  him,  and  of  that  number  I  am  one. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Would  the  witness  give,  under  a  license  law,  power 
to  interfere  with  the  principle  of  leaving  every  man  to  drink  when  and  how 
much  he  pleased  ? 

A.  I  have  already  said  that  I  think  the  sale  of  ardent  spirits  should  be 
regulated,  because,  when  it  is  used  to  excess,  we  all  concede  that  it  is  not  only 
injurious  to  the  individual,  but  invades  the  rights  of  society,  which  society  has 
a  right  to  protect.  The  precise  line  is  difficult  to  draw. 

Q.  Do  not  taxes  to  repair  the  ravages  of  intemperance  infringe  the  rights 
of  the  individual  ? 

A.  No  more  than  taxes  to  repair  the  damage  caused  by  any  other  crimes. 
When  this  crops  out  to  a  crime ;  when  it  becomes  an  annoyance  to  the  public ; 
when  society  becomes  a  sufferer  by  it,  then  society  has  a  right  to  step  in  and 
say,  "  Thus  far  and  no  farther.'* 

Adjourned. 


184  APPENDIX. 


SEVENTH    DAY. 

FRIDAY,  March  1st,  1867. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  GEORGE  WASHINGTON  WARREN. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Give  your  residence  and  official  position  at  the 
present  time  ? 

A.  I  am  a  resident  of  Charlestown  and  Justice  of  the  Police  Court  in 
Charlestowr.. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  held  that  position  ? 

A.  The  court  was  established  in  1862.  I  have 'held  that  office  for  five 
years,  and  before  that  time  I  acted  as  Justice  of  the  Peace. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  connected  with  the  various  offices  ? 

A.     I  was  Mayor  during  the  first  four  years, — from  1847  to  1850  inclusive. 

Q.  I  wish  to  ask  your  opinion,  so  far  as  you  have  been  able  to  judge  from 
your  official  positions,  of  the  effect  and  influence  of  the  present  prohibitory 
liquor  law  ? 

A.  I  was  in  the  Legislature  for  the  first  time,  in  1838,  and  gave  my  vote 
for  the  temperance  law  at  that  time,  and  voted  to  incorporate  a  temperance 
society.  The  passage  of  that  law  was  considered  at  that  time  a  great  desider- 
atum, and  for  the  benefit  of  the  temperance  cause,  and  in  deference  to  the 
judgment  of  older  persons  than  myself,  I  voted  for  it.  I  have  watched  the 
operation  of  the  law  ever  since.  I  have  devoted  considerable  attention  to 
the  subject  of  legislation  upon  the  matter  of  temperance.  I  became  satisfied 
during  that  session  of  the  Legislature,  as  I  became  better  acquainted  with  the 
tendencies  of  the  law,  that  it  was  injudicious.  The  law,  it  seems  to  me,  is 
contrary  to  the  actual  public  sentiment  of  the  people  of  the  Commonwealth, — 
that  is,  it  is  in  opposition  to  the  practices  of  the  people,  because  it  is  based 
upon  the  idea  that  intoxicating  liquors  can  in  no  way  be  used  as  a  beverage. 
There  are  now  no  means  of  purchasing  liquor  legally,  unless  it  is  bought  of 
the  importer,  as  the  only  provision  in  the  law  for  its  sale  is  by  agents,  who 
are  restricted  to  the  selling  for  mechanical  and  medicinal  purposes  only.  I 
believe  that  a  majority  of  the  people  do  use  it  in  other  ways  than  for  mechani- 
cal and  medicinal  purposes.  It  is  used,  for  instance,  for  domestic  purposes. 
I  think  such  a  state  of  things  tends  to  a  certain  extent 'to  create  a  want  of 
respect  for  authority,  and  for  law.  A  law  of  this  kind  is  opposed  to  the  pre- 
vailing habits  of  the  people.  I  think  that  I  have  seen  many  instances  in 
which  that  appears.  If  you  will  allow  me,  I  will  give  an  illustration.  I 
recollect  that  in  1847  the  question  of  licenses  came  before  the  Legislature. 
The  city  government  of  Charlestown  voted  for  a  license  ;  the  city  of  Boston 
against  a  license.  That  same  year  there  was  a  visit  of  the  President  of  the 
United  States,  to  Boston.  Out  of  respect  to  that  vote,  at  the  public  dinner 
given  to  the  President,  there  was  neither  wine  or  spirituous  liquors  upon  the 
table.  It  was  a  cold  water  dinner,  although  in  all  other  respects,  it  was  as 


APPENDIX.  185 

expensive  a  dinner  as  could  be  provided.  But  afterwards,  in  the  private 
parlors  of  the  citizens  of  whom  the  President  and  suite  were  guests,  spirituous 
liquors  were  furnished.  It  was  made  a  subject  of  remark  by  members  of 
Congress,  afterwards,  that  it  was  a  queer  way  of  doing,  for  the  authorities  to 
withhold  wine  at  an  entertainment  of  that  kind,  and  afterwards,  in  the  private 
rooms,  assent  to  its  use.  They  would  have  much  preferred  taking  the  glass 
of  wine  at  the  meal,  to  taking  it  afterwards  and  in  private.  I  think  that 
such  exhibitions  as  that  do  more  to  create  a  general  disrespect  for  law,  than 
a  proper  recognition  of  the  habits  of  the  people.  Although  I  voted  for  the 
prohibitory  liquor  law,  yet  I  became  convicted,  while  I  was  in  that  Legisla- 
ture, that  I  ought  not  to  have  voted  for  such  a  law,  unless  I  was  satisfied  that 
a  majority  of  the  people  had  come  to  the  point  of  total  abstinence  from 
intoxicating  liquors.  When  a  majority  of  the  people  adopt  total  abstinence 
as  the  rule  of  practice,  then  a  prohibitory  liquor  law  will  do,  but  if  the  people, 
in  their  general  habits  allow  the  use  of  wines  and  liquors  in  certain  forms, 
either  for  medicinal)  mechanical  or  culinary  purposes,  then  it  seems  to  me 
injudicious  to  attempt  to  have  a  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect,  within  your  own  sphere  of  observation,  of  the 
present  law,  in  respect  to  the  use  of  liquors  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  the  law  has  produced  any  effect  in  the  use  of  liquors  in 
private  houses,  and  at  entertainments.  I  think  the  habits  of  society  are  no 
more  tending  towards  temperance — strict  temperance — total  abstinence — 
now  than  they  were  twenty-five  years  ago.  If  I  may  judge,  I  think  that 
there  are  more  families  that  do  not  adhere  to  the  rule  of  total  abstinence, 
now,  than  there  were  twenty-five  years  ago. 

Q.  How  in  regard  to  the  prevalence  of  intemperance  ;  has  it  been  checked, 
or  otherwise  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think,  sir,  that  it  has  been  checked. 

Q.     Has  liquor  been  publicly  sold  in  Charlestown  ? 

A.  I  understand  that  it  has  been.  I  took  occasion  to  inquire  of  the 
collector  of  the  internal  revenue  taxes  how  many  licenses  had  been  granted  in 
Charlestown  by  the  United  States  authorities,  and  he  said  there  were  two 
hundred,  who  had  paid  licenses  of  twenty  dollars  each.  It  struck  me  as  an 
anomaly  that  the  general  government  should  be  dealing  out  licenses,  (and 
many  who  take  them  really  believe  that  it  gives  them  authority  to  sell  liquor,) 
and  the  State  government  at  the  same  time  having  a  prohibitory  liquor  law. 
I  think  that  there  should  be  a  co-operation  between  the  general  and  State 
governments  in  the  matter  of  temperance.  If  the  determined  policy  of  the 
State  is  for  a  prohibitory  law,  the  Acts  of  Congress  should  coincide  with  that 
policy. 

Q.     Is  intemperance  increasing  or  diminishing  in  Charlestown  ? 

A.  I  should  say  that  it  did  not  diminish.  Our  population  is  a  fluctuating 
population.  I  do  not  think  that  among  the  settled  population  there  are  a 
great  many  cases  of  intemperance,  but  I  do  not  think  that  it  is  diminishing. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Did  you  say  that  two  hundred  licenses  have  been 
granted  in  Charlestown  the  present  year  ? 

A.  I  asked  the  collector  yesterday,  and  I  understood  him  to  say  two 
hundred. 

24 


186  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Do  you  think,  at  this  moment,  that  there  are  two  hundred  or  more 
places  of  open  sale  in  Charlestown  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know,  sir.  I  know  that  there  have  been  several  cases  brought 
before  the  court,  and  prosecution  has  been  sustained  according  to  law.  I  do 
not  know  how  many  there  are  in  operation. 

Q.  How  do  you  generally  find  persons  when  brought  before  the  court  for 
violations  of  the  law, — are  they  disposed  to  contend  or  to  adjust  the  case  ? 

A.  I  should  think  that  about  one-third  of  them  were  in  favor  of  adjust- 
ment, and  the  remainder  enter  an  appeal.  They  may  adjust  after  an  appeal 
to  a  higher  court.  That  appeal  may  be  with  a  view  to  await  the  action  of 
the  authorities  at  Washington,  and  sometimes  it  may  be  in  the  hope  of  chang- 
ing the  testimony  by  a  lapse  of  time. 

Q.     Not,  however,  in  the  hope  of  escaping  by  any  such  change  ? 

A.     No,  sir;  I  suppose  not.     It  is  generally  done  by  the  advice  of  counsel. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  feeling  of  the  dealers  of  Charlestown,  at  this 
moment,  is  that  they  are  oppressed  by  the  law,  or  do  they  feel  that  the  law  is 
in  triumph  over  them,  and  that  they  must  bow  to  the  law  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell.  I  have  had  no  conversation  with  dealers  in  relation  to 
it,  and  do  not  know  what  their  opinions  are. 

Q.  What  would  you  infer  from  the  fact  that  one-third  of  the  cases  of  viola- 
tion are  adjusted  ? 

A.     There  is  a  feeling  of  tenderness,  of  course. 

Q.  Was  the  penalty,  in  the  case  of  those  who  were  ready  to  adjust,  pretty 
uniformly  imprisonment,  as  well  as  fine  ?  Were  they  second  cases  ? 

A.     No,  sir;  I  think  they  were  first  cases. 

Q.  That  shows,  then,  still  more  clearly,  the  feeling  that  they  must  submit 
to  the  law  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  have  no  doubt  that  the  law  could  be  enforced  in  Charles- 
town. 

Q.     And  the  traffic  suppressed,  or  as  much  so  as  crime  in  general  ? 

A.     Yes ;  there  would  be  some  devices,  however,  to  evade  the  law. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  there  would  be  any  substantial  distinction  in  the 
degree  in  which  this  law  could  be  enforced,  as  compared  with  the  laws 
against  adultery,  gaming,  or  counterfeiting ;  that  is,  so  far  as  the  suppression 
of  the  open  sale  of  liquor  is  concerned  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Your  recommendation  of  the  license  law  is  based,  then,  not  on  any 
inability  to  execute  this  law,  but  upon  the  fundamental  rights  of  individuals 
to  the  moderate  use  of  beverages  ? 

A.     Upon  the  custom  of  the  people,  connected  with  the  right. 

Q.  Would  you  pursue  a  policy  that  would  perpetuate  all  the  social  evils 
attending  the  use  of  liquors,  merely  in  conformity  to  an  existing  custom  which 
has  no  principle  to  stand  upon  ? 

A.     Of  course  not. 

Q.  Then,  when  you  speak  of  the  right  and  privilege  of  individuals,  in  the 
moderate  use  of  liquor,  would  you  speak  of  the  duty  of  moderately  using 
alcoholic  beverages  ? 


APPENDIX.  187 

A.    No,  sir;  but  I  think  that  the  duty  of  total  abstinence  has  yet  to  be 
established.     I  think  it  cannot  be  assumed.     I  should  go  for  the  protection  of 
minors  and  young  people,  and  for  any  legislation  that  protected  them. 
Q.     Why,  then,  would  you  subject  minors  to  the  deprivation  of  a  good  ? 
A.     I  would  do  it  for  the  same  reason  that  I  would  keep  a  child  under 
control  in  the  use  of  his  property.     He  is  not  a  judge  how  far  he  can  go. 
Q.     But  you  would  not  neglect  to  clothe  and  feed  the  child  ? 
A.     Of  course  not,  but  I  would  teach  him  moderation  in  all  things. 
Q.     You  would  give  him  all  of  his  property  that  his  personal  good  required  ? 
A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  AVould  you  give  him,  while  a  minor,  liquor  as  a  beverage,  upon  the 
same  principle  ? 

A.     No,  sir  ;  I  should  advise  every  young  man  to  abstain. 
Q.    My  point  is  this :  that  if  the  moderate  use  of  liquor  is  a  good,  why 
deprive  minors  of  it  ? 

A .     Because  they  may  not 

Q-    be  fit  subjects  for  a  blessing  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  but  because  they  are  not  old  enough  to  decide  for  themselves. 
I  think  a  parent  should  direct  the  conduct  of  his  child  in  all  things, — in  dress, 
in  eating,  as  well  as  in  smoking  or  drinking ;  that  he  should  prohibit  those 
things.  But  when  a  child  arrives  at  age,  I  would  leave  it  to  him  to  decide 
whether  he  should  smoke  a  cigar,  or  drink  a  glass  of  wine. 

Q.  I  agree  with  you  that  the  parent  should  direct  the  child  while  incom- 
petent to  decide  for  itself;  but  my  question  touches  upon  the  principle 
involved  in  that  decision.  Why  should  a  parent  decide  to  exclude  his  child 
from  good,  or  good  from  his  child  ? 

A.  The  parent  is  the  guardian  of  the  child  until  the  child  arrives  at  the 
age  of  discretion,  then  the  child  must  decide  for  itself. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  regard  the  use  of  liquor  as  a  good,  or  to  require 
the  opposite  to  be  established ;  and  I  ask  why  you  would  not  give  it  to  a 
minor  ? 

A.  I  think  it  should  first  be  established  that  the  temperate  use  of  intoxi- 
cating liquor  is  an  evil. 

Q.     You  think  that  it  is  a  good  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  evil  should  first  be  established.  You  assume  that,  from 
your  point  of  view. 

Q.  You  assume,  then,  that  the  evil  of  the  moderate  use  of  intoxicating 
beverages  must  be  established,  and  until  it  is  established,  you  assume  such  use 
to  be  a  good.  I  stand  upon  your  assumption, — it  is  a  good ;  and  I  ask,  why, 
then,  exclude  children  from  the  enjoyment  of  that  good  ? 

A.  For  the  same  reason  that  I  would  direct  them  in  everything  else.  They 
are  to  be  taught  moderation. 

Q.  You  do  not  exclude  children  from  the  good  of  knowledge,  of  food,  of 
clothing,  of  medicine,  when  sick  ? 

A .     We  direct  their  reading  and  studies. 
Q.     And  you  direct  them  to  good  books  ? 
A.     Yes. 
Q.     And  to  good  food  and  drink  ? 


188  APPENDIX. 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Why  not  give  them  all  kinds  of  good  food  or  good  drink  ? 

A.  You  would  not  indulge  a  child  in  the  free  use  of  money,  although 
when  he  becomes  of  age,  he  may  be  entitled  to  the  possession  of  a  large 
property. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  culinary,  and:  other  subordinate  uses  of  alcoholic  prepa- 
rations, the  deprivation  of  which  is  an  inconvenience.  Do  you  consider  the 
inconvenience  of  such  deprivation,  when  compared  with  the  existing  social 
evils  flowing  from  the  drinking  usages  of  society,  as  worthy  of  mention  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  and  I  think  such  inconveniences  should  be  recognized  by  the 
Legislature  in  the  framing  of  a  law ;  but  at  the  same  time  the  abuses  of 
drinking  should  be  guarded  against. 

Q,.  The  legitimate  use  of  liquors  for  mechanical  and  medicinal  uses,  is 
recognized  now  ;  but  how  would  a  license  law  prevent  all  the  existing  evils 
that  flow  from  the  moderate  use  of  liquor  ?  Out  of  moderation  comes 
immoderation,  and  the  totality  of  the  social  evils  of  live. 

A.  I  think  that  there  could  be  a  license  law  by  which  discretion  could  be 
invested  in  some  proper  authority,  by  whom  victuallers,  &c.,  could  be  licensed 
to  sell  liquors  with  their  meals.  I  think  that  dram-shops  should  be  discoun- 
tenanced. 

Q.  What  is  the  substantial  difference  between  liquor-drinking  in  a 
victualling-house  and  liquor-drinking  in  a  dram-shop  ? 

A.  There,  I  think,  you  go  to  the  foundation  of  the  matter.  I  think  there 
is  a  peculiarity  of  our  people  as  distinguished  from  others  in  foreign  countries. 
How  it  has  come  to  be  so,  I  cannot  tell,  but  in  travelling  abroad  you  find  very 
few  drunkards  and  very  few  dram-shops. 

Q.  My  question  is,  what  is  the  difference,  in  principle,  between  liquor- 
drinking  in  a  saloon  by  the  wayside,  as  a  man  passes  to  his  business,  and 
drinking  in  the  place  where  he  takes  his  dinner  or  lunch  ?  Do  you  make  a 
discrimination  between  the  two  ?  What  is  the  difference  in  principle  ? 

A.  If  you  ask  me  the  tendency  of  the  custom,  I  can  give  you  an  answer 
The  excess  makes  the  difference. 

Q.  But  why  is  there  likely  to  be  any  more  excess  in  the  dram-shop  by  the 
wayside  than  in  the  dram-shop  where  the  victuals  are  kept  ? 

A.  A  peculiarity  of  our  people  explains  that.  In  a  dram-shop,  where 
persons  loiter  their  time,  and  drink  without  taking  any  food  with  their  drink, 
the  habit  of  intemperance  is  formed  ;  but  where  a  person  takes,  occasionally, 
a  glass  of  wine  with  his  food,  as  does  the  person  who  has  occasion  to  go  to  a 
drinking-house  for  a  meal,  the  effect  is  different. 

Q.  Can  you  put  anything  into  a  license  law  that  will  prevent  people  from 
calling  at  eating-houses,  if  it  be  also  a  dram-shop,  and  getting  their  drams  ? 

A .     You  could  frame  snch  a  law. 

Q.  I  should  like  to  see  the  draft  of  it.  You  spoke  of  the  majority  of  the 
people  of  Charlestown  using  liquors  in  their  families.  Do  you  mean  the  ma- 
jority of  the  people  of  the  circle  in  which  you  most  affiliate,  or  the  majority 
of  the  people — the  middling  ranks  of  the  people  of  the  city  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  should  think  that  the  majority  of  the  people  used  it  in 
some  form. 


APPENDIX.  189 

Q.     The  question  refers  to  its  habitual  use  as  well  as  to  an  occasional  use  ? 

A.  I  suppose,  to  put  it  in  another  form,  that  the  majority  of  the  people 
are  not  total  abstinence  people.  I  do  not,  myself,  habitually  use  wine  or 
liquor :  a  week  may  pass  without  my  taking  a  glass  of  wine  ;  but,  at  the  same 
time,  if  I  have  a  friend  visiting  me,  I  put  some  good  wine  on  the  table.  I  do 
not  use  it  habitually,  however.  I  presume  there  are  many  others  who  use  it 
in  like  manner,  and  who  do  not  adopt  total  abstinence  as  a  rule,  or  adhere  to 
the  law  of  temperance. 

Q.    By  which  you  mean  the  moderate  use  ? 

A.     Yes. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  a  visit  of  President  Polk  to  Boston  :  who  accompanied 
him?  . 

A.     The  Secretary  of  State,  Mr.  Buchanan. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  President  Polk,  himself,  in  the  private  parlors 
where  he  was  invited,  and  where  you  say  liquor  was  furnished,  partook  of 
liquor  ? 

A.     I  recollect  seeing  him  take  a  glass  of  wine. 

Q.  Are  you  very  confident  upon  that  point?  It  is  generally  understood 
that  he  was  a  total  abstinence  man  ? 

A .     I  know  that  he  did. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  the  habits  of  the  then  Secretary  of  State  in  that 
respect  ?  Did  he  drink  more  freely,  or  less  so,  than  the  President  ? 

A.     I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  either  drank  freely. 

Q.  Both  drank  in  moderation ;  you  do  not  intend  to  imply  more  than 
that? 

A.  I  recall  the  circumstance  of  drinking  a  glass  of  wine  with  the  Presi- 
dent myself.  I  took  no  note  of  the  others,  but  I  remember  that  fact. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  a  matter  of  censure,  under  any  aspect,  that  the  au- 
thorities of  Boston  or  of  Massachusetts,  on  such  occasions,  should  omit  to 
furnish  liquors  for  the  public  table,  even  though  they  should  use  it  privately  ? 

A.  That  is  a  question  for  them  to  decide  upon.  I  merely  meant  that  it 
was  an  occasion  of  remark  abroad,  and  rather  a  reflection  upon  the  people 
and  authorities,  that  they  should  be  inconsistent. 

Q.  I  will  ask  one  other  question,  with  the  leave  of  the  Committee ;  it  is 
this :  Whether  in  the  judgment  of  Justice  Warren,  our  legislation  upon  the 
matter  of  social  evils  should  be  upon  the  level  of  the  lower  class  of  society, 
and  of  the  more  questionable  habits  of  the  people,  or  on  a  level  with  a  higher 
and  more  moral  class,  and  safer,  worthier  habits  ?  Should  the  laws,  upon 
such  subjects,  be  a  little  below  or  a  little  above  the  prevailing  tone  of  public 
sentiment  ? 

A.     I  think  the  laws  should  be  up  to  the  public  sentiment. 

Q.     Do  you  not  think  the  law  a  great  educator  ? 

A.     Of  course. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  it  desirable  that  total  abstinence  should  be  made  the 
practice  of  the  people  of  any  and  of  every  community,  as  far  as  possible  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;  but  I  doubt  whether  law  can  make  it  so. 


190  APPENDIX. 

Q.  If  the  existing  prohibitory  liquor  law  could  be  executed,  and  it  should 
result  in  total  abstinence  from  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  beverage,  do  you 
think  the  effect  upon  the  community  would  be  otherwise  than  good  ? 

A.  I  think  that,  under  the  existing  state  of  things,  the  law  being  so  much 
in  opposition  to  the  prevailing  habits  of  the  people — of  all  classes  of  society 
— that  it  creates  a  disrespect  for  law,  and  for  authority  generally. 

Q.     You  think  then  such  a  law  could  not  be  executed  ? 

A.  There  would,  of  course,  be  no  opposition  to  the  execution  of  the  law. 
I  think  that  the  authority  of  the  law  officers  can  always  be  maintained. 

Q.  Speaking  of  disrespect  for  law ;  do  you  think  that  a  law,  embodying  the 
truth,  though  violated,  will  create  as  much  disrespect  for  law,  as  one  embody- 
ing an  error,  although  it  be  obeyed  ? 

A.     I  do  not  see  the  application  of  the  question. 

Q.  In  what  district  is  Charlestown,  as  respects  the  assessment  of  licenses  for 
the  sale  of  liquors  ? 

A.    No.  G. 

Q.    In  the  whole  district,  the  number  returned  as  having  licenses,  is  197  ? 

A.     That  is  for  the  new  licenses. 

Q.     No,  sir ;  for  the  United  States  licenses  of  last  year  ? 

A .  Mr.  Wilson,  the  collector  in  Charlestown,  told  me  that  there  were  two 
hundred.  He  may  be  mistaken. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  licenses  being  granted  in  1847  in  Charlestown  and  not  in 
Boston  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  think,  if  the  reverse  were  the  case, — if  Boston  licensed  and 
Charlestown  did  not, — that  the  fact  of  Boston  granting  licenses  would  affect 
the  temperance  cause  in  Charlestown  ?  Suppose  that  Charlestown  wished  to 
suppress  the  traffic,  would  it  be  the  more  difficult  if  licenses  were  freely 
granted  in  Boston  ? 

A.  I  think  there  would  be  no  great  inconvenience  resulting.  When  the 
authorities  of  one  place  refused  to  grant  licenses  and  the  other  granted  them, 
I  do  not  think  there  would  be  any  practical  difficulty. 

Q.  You  do  not  mean  to  say  that  liquor  would  be  had  more  freely  than  it 
would  be  otherwise — more  than  it  would  be  if  Boston  did  not  license,  but 
took  the  same  ground  that  Charlestown  was  supposed  to  take  in  the 
question  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  that  would  affect  the  obtaining  of  liquors. 

TESTIMONY  OF  JOHN  KURTZ. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     What  position  do  you  occupy  in  Boston  ? 

A.     lam  Chief  of  Police. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  held  that  position  ? 

A.     Four  years. 

Q.  During  the  period  of  your  holding  office,  will  you  be  kind  enough  to 
state  what  has  been  the  state  of  things  in  regard  to  the  drinking  and  selling 
of  intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.    Be  a  little  more  definite,  and  I  will  answer  directly  to  the  question. 

Q.     What  is  the  number  of  places  in  Boston  where  liquor  is  openly  sold  ? 


APPENDIX.  191 

A.  In  December  last,  the  number  of  open  places  for  the  sale  of  liquor,  was 
1,515.  I  have  here  the  statistics  for  a  number  of  years  past. 

Q.     Be  kind  enough  to  give  them  ? 

A.  In  1854,  1,500;  1855,  1,621 ;  1856, 1,927;  1857,  1,995;  1858,  1,940; 
1859,  2,018;  1860,2,220;  1861,  1,904;  1862,1,870;  1863,1,951;  1864, 
1,857;  1865,  1,712;  and  in  1866,  1,515. 

Q.     These  are  all  public,  known  places  of  sale,  are  they  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  know  the  place  and  number  of  each  ? 

A.  For  the  last  three  years,  we  have  kept  the  name  and  place  of  business 
of  every  man  reported. 

Q.  Have  you  reason  to  believe  that  there  are  secret  sales  in  addition  to 
these  ? 

A.  We  have  reason  to  believe  that  recently  a  great  deal  more  liquor  is 
sold  secretly  than  before. 

Q.     How  recently  do  you  mean  ? 

A.  Within  the  last  two  years  ;  more  particularly  within  the  last  year.  A 
brewer,  a  short  time  since,  told  me  that  his  trade  was  very  much  changed ; 
that  now  he  gets  a  great  many  more  orders  from  private  families  than 
formerly.  He  says  that  in  the  first  place  a  family  begins  by  ordering  one  keg 
of  lager  at  the  latter  part  of  the  week  ;  soon  they  will  want  two  kegs  per 
week  ;  thus  gradually  increasing  until  finally  they  order  six  or  eight  kegs  to 
keep  them  over  Sunday. 

Q.     Do  you  know  what  kind  of  people  he  referred  to  ? 

A.  I  think,  from  what  he  said,  that  the  families  he  alluded  to  are  princi- 
pally German, — those  who  drink  lager. 

Q.  Have  you  any  means  of  forming  an  approximate  opinion  as  to  the 
relative  quantity  of  liquor  sold  and  drank  privately  by  being  sold  to  families  ? 

A.     I  have  no  means  of  ascertaining  that. 

Q.  Can  you  give  any  statistics  of  the  cases  of  drunkenness  that  have  come 
within  the  knowledge  of  the  police  ? 

A.  I  can  give  you  statistics  back  as  far  as  1854.  The  number  of  arrests 
made,  and  of  persons  brought  to  the  station-houses  in  different  degrees  of 
drunkenness,  in  1854,  was  6,983;  1855,  6,987;  1856,  6,780;  1857,  8,720; 
1858,  8,930;  1859,  9,634;  1860,  13,157;  1861,  17,324;  1862,  14,904;  1863, 
17,967.  1863  was  my  first  year  in  office.  I  found  that  all  persons  then 
brought  into  a  station-house,  whether  they  were  partially  or  wholly  drunk, 
were  put  down  as  arrested  for  drunkenness,  and  it  seemed  to  me  that  that  was 
not  the  proper  way  to  dispose  of  them,  but  that  they  should  be  separated,  and 
that  none  should  be  set  down  as  arrested  for  drunkenness,  except  those  who, 
according  to  the  law,  were  to  be  sent  to  the  court.  I  accordingly  ordered 
that  of  those  arrested,  the  partially  drunk  should  be  separated  from  those 
who  were  staggering  drunk.  The  court  requires  us  to  swear  that  a  man 
is  staggering  drunk  before  we  can  get  a  warrant.  If  a  man  was  partially 
oblivious,  we  kept  him  until  he  was  sober  and  then  sent  him  home.  In  1864 
only  those  were  put  down  as  drunk  who  were  sent  to  the  court.  The  rest 
were  put  down  as  "  lodgers."  All  who  were  arrested  for  drunkenness  and 
sent  to  the  court,  were  approached  by  an  officer  for  the  purpose  of  getting 


192  APPENDIX. 

their  evidence  against  the  places  where  they  obtained  their  liquor.  Each  was 
asked,  according  to  the  prohibitory  law,  where  he  got  his  liquor.  If  he  would 
disclose,  he  would  be  taken  as  a  witness,  and  not  be  proceeded  against  for 
drunkenness.  The  officer  having  that  matter  in  charge  is  summoned  here, 
and  can  testify  in  regard  to  it,  but  my  impression  is  that  he  never  found  one 
who  would  make  such  a  disclosure.  They  had  rather  be  proceeded  against 
for  drunkenness  than  disclose  the  place  where  they  get  their  liquor.  In  1864, 
with  that  separation,  we  reported  2,561  as  arrested  for  drunkenness.  We 
estimated  the  number  of  those  reported  as  lodgers,  but  who  were  more  or  less 
intoxicated,  as  being  12,000,  which  would  make  the  total  number  arrested,  as 
compared  with  former  reports,  14,561.  In  1865,  we  arrested  5,725  for 
drunkenness,  and  estimated  the  number  arrested  as  partially  intoxicated  as 
7,000,  which  would  make  the  entire  number  12,725.  In  1866,  the  arrests  for 
drunkenness  were  5,752,  and  the  number  of  those  arrested  as  partially  drunk, 
9,000,  making  the  total  14,752. 

Q.  Have  you  any  means  of  finding  out,  with  any  degree  of  accuracy,  the 
number  of  places  where  liquor  is  secretly  sold  ? 

A.  We  never  have  made  any  attempt  to  ascertain.  I  do  not  know  what 
we  might  do  if  we  were  to  try. 

Q.     Has  the  number  of  such  places  increased  during  the  last  year  ? 

A.  We  have  reason  to  believe  so  from  the  reports  coming  to  us,  but  not 
from  any  statistics  that  we  have  taken.  I  presume  that  our  only  way  to  get 
that  information  would  be  to  make  the  acquaintance  of  the  families  where  it 
was  sold  or  used.  I  do  not  know  how  such  an  attempt  might  turn  out. 

Q.  I  will  ask  you  under  which  system,  or  a  modification  of  which  system, 
you  think  you  would  be  best  able  to  restrain  the  excessive  use  and  sale  of 
intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.     I  do  not  understand  that  question. 

Q.  What  in  your  opinion  is  your  ability,  as  things  now  exist  in  Boston, 
to  enforce  the  present  law  ? 

A.  My  individual  opinion  is,  that  if  a  combined  effort  upon  the  part  of 
the  public,  generally,  was  made  to  close  all  open  sales  of  liquor,  to  a  certain 
degree,  it  would  be  successful. 

Q.  Why  cannot  the  police  do  it  alone,  without  any  combined  effort  upon 
the  part  of  the  public  ? 

A.  Simply  because  public  sentiment  is  against  such  an  attempt.  I  think 
that  it  would  be  morally  impossible  for  the  police  to  enforce  any  law  that  was 
in  violation  of  public  sentiment. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  in  regard  to  the  estimate  in  which  this  law  is 
held  in  the  public  opinion  ? 

A.    I  should  judge  that  it  was  very  unpopular. 

Q.  Suppose  the  present  law  were  changed  and  that  restricted  permis- 
sion be  given  to  retailers  to  furnish  intoxicating  drinks,  what  then  would  be 
the  tendency  of  the  law  in  breaking  up  the  secret  sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  think  such  a  change  would  be  an  advantage.  I  think  public  opinion 
would  sustain  the  police  in  punishing  all  violations  of  the  law  if  there  was  a 
reasonable  opportunity  of  obtaining  licenses. 


APPENDIX.  193 

Q.  I  desire  to  ask  you  a  question  of  fact,  as  bearing  upon  the  question  of 
public  opinion,  whether  during  the  time  you  have  held  your  present  official 
position,  there  has  been  any  combined  aid  given  to  the  police  authorities  on 
the  part  of  the  public,  in  the  enforcement  of  the  present  law  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  How  far  has  the  city  government,  unaided  by  public  sentiment, 
endeavored  to  enforce  this  law  ?  • 

A.     Since  I  have  been  in  office  ? 

Q.    Yes,  sir. 

A .  During  the  first  year  of  my  being  in  office,  we  made  complaints 
against  parties  under  the  Nuisance  Act ;  before  I  came  into  office,  attempts 
had  been  made,  as  the  records  show,  to  enforce  the  prohibitory  law,  but  the 
jurors*  would  not  agree ;  the  business  of  the  courts  became  clogged ;  the 
police  furnished  the  courts  with  so  many  cases  and  the  juries  failing  to  agree, 
but  little  business  could  be  done  in  the  courts,  and  the  district-attorney 
requested  one  of  my  predecessors  not  to  make  any  more  complaints.  There 
was  a  test  case  made  up.  My  deputy  made  up  the  test  case,  and  he  will  tell 
you,  I  think,  that  the  counsel  for  the 

Mr.  MORSE  suggested  that  if  the  deputy  was  here,  he  should  testify  in 
regard  to  that  case. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  What  number  do  you  say  you  have  on  your 
list,  reported  as  selling  liquor  in  1854  ? 

A.    1,500. 

Q.    And  how  many  in  1866  ? 

A.    1,515. 

Q.    How  many  cases  of  drunkenness  were  there  in  1863  ? 

A.    17,967. 

Q.    How  many  in  1866  ? 

A.  14,752.  The  years  1861,  '62,  '63  and  '64,  were  the  war  years,  as  we 
call  them.  There  was  rather  more  license  given  during  those  years  than 
there  was  before. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  There  was  probably  more  intoxication  during 
those  years  than  there  was  before  or  since  ? 

A     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  What  was  the  proportion  of  drunkenness  before 
and  since  the  war  ? 

A.  In  1859,  9,334  arrests  were  made.  In  1860,  13,157,  and  in  1866, 
14,752. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  recollect  the  population  in  1860  and 
1866? 

A.  The  estimated  population  of  Boston  in  1860  was  177,902,  and  the 
census  in  1865  gave  192,324. 

Q.  You  stated  that  public  opinion  was  an  obstacle  to  the  enforcement  of 
the  law? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  does  that  public  opinion  manifest  itself ;  how  does  it  interfere 
with  you  ? 

25 


194  APPENDIX. 

A.  It  manifests  itself  in  various  ways.  We  find  temperance  people, — 
people  who  come  up  before  this  Committee,  and  kit  around  here  with  them, 
patronizing  places  where  liquor  is  sold,  in  preference  to  places  where  liquor 
is  not  sold,  and  where  people  are  trying  to  keep  temperance  houses.  That 
is  one  way  in  which  public  opinion  manifests  itself. 

Q.     How  does  that  interfere  with  your  operations  ? 

A .  It  interferes  in  this  way ;  when  people  in  general,  by  their  acts  and 
practice,  go  directly  in  opposition  to  the  law,  people  who  are  jurors,  do  the 
same  thing. 

Q.  That  is  ta  say,  because  the  world  is  wicked,  you  cannot  enforce  the 
laws? 

A.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that.  The  world  has  always  been  wicked  yet 
some  laws  have  been  and  can  be  enforced. 

Q.  We  will  admit  as  much  wickedness  as  you  please,  but  how  did  it 
directly  interfere  with  your  operations  ?  Please  state  what  obstacle  appeared 
in  consequence  of  that  ? 

A.  I  told  you  that  we  made  complaints  under  the  prohibitory  law  but 
the  juries  would  not  agree,  and  consequently  the  business  of  the  courts 
became  clogged.  We  could  get  convictions  readily  under  the  Nuisance  Act ; 
we  had  no  trouble  about  that.  I  was  myself  some  six  months  on  the  jury 
in  1860  and  we  had  several  cases  under  the  Nuisance  Act,  but  I  think  none 
under  the  prohibitory  law.  My  recollection  is,  that  we  had  three  liquor-dealers 
upon  the  jury,  and  they  never  failed  to  vote  to  convict  where  there  was 
evidence  under  the  Nuisance  Act. 

Q.    Would  they  fail  to  convict  under  the  Common  Seller  Act  ? 

A.  I  could  not  judge,  because  we  never  had  a  case  under  that  Act ;  but  I 
presume,  from  the  action  of  juries  in  former  times,  they  would  have  failed  to 
convict.  I  sent  a  great  many  cases  to  the  grand  jury,  both  last  year  and  the 
year  before,  under  the  Common  Seller  Act,  but  the  grand  jury  found  bills 
under  the  Nuisance  Act,  and  I  was  a  little  surprised  (as  I  had  complained  of 
them  under  the  Common  Seller  Act,  and  had  evidence  to  convict  them  under 
that  Act)  that  the  jury  should  bring  in  indictments  under  the  Nuisance  Act, 
and  I  made  inquiries  to  know  why  it  was.  The  district-attorney  told  me 
that  the  grand  jury  thought  that  they  would  indict  those  who  ought  to  go  to 
the  House  of  Correction,  under  the  prohibitory  law,  and  those  that  they 
thought  did  not  need  to  go  there  they  would  bring  in  under  the  Nuisance  Act. 

[Mr.  SPOONER  stated  that,  speaking  for  himself,  he  considered  the  diffi- 
culty in  obtaining  convictions  from  the  juries,  under  the  prohibitory  law,  an 
excuse  for  the  inaction  of  the  city  government  in  enforcing  that  law.] 

Q.  I  understand  you,  then,  that  you  could  get  convictions  under  the 
Nuisance  Act ;  that  there  was  no  particular  obstacle  in  the  jury  to  convic- 
tions under  that  Act  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  How  many  cases  have  you  brought  before  the  courts  in  a  year  under 
the  Nuisance  Act  ? 

A.    Within  the  last  year  ? 

Q.     In  any  year  since  you  have  Jbeen  in  office. 


APPENDIX.  195 

A.  My  impression  now  is  that  we  calculated  to  give  the  court  some  four  or 
five  cases  for  every  day  they  were  in  session — as  many  cases  as  we  thought 
they  could  get  through  without  interfering  with  the  business  of  the 
court. 

Q.    The  penalty  was  fifty  dollars  at  first,  was  it  not  ? 
A.    I  think  the  penalty  was  at  the  option  of  the  court. 
Q.     Until  the  last  two  years,  was  not  that  the  penalty  generally  inflicted 
by  the  court  ? 

A.     I  could  not  answer  as  to  that. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  testifying  before  the  legislative  committee  two  years 
ago  the  same  thing  as  you  now  do,  that  it  was  easy  to  convict  under  the 
Nuisance  Act,  but  impossible  or  very  difficult  under  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.    1  think  I  said  something  to  that  effect. 

Q.  And  you  testified  that  you  thought  that  the  jury  would  bear  a  heavier 
fine  than  was  inflicted,  which  was  $50.  You  thought  the  jury  would  convict 
if  the  fine  was  $200,  and  you  recommended  that  sum  ? 

A.    I  think  that  I  did. 

Q.  A  law  was  passed  in  conformity  to  your  suggestion.  We  want  to  know 
what  the  trouble  is  with  that  law,  and  to  learn  whether  another  would  work 
better.  We  want  to  know  whether  there  has  been  any  serious  effort  to  put 
down  the  liquor  traffic  under  the  existing  laws.  Will  you  please  state  how 
many  cases  you  have  presented  ?  Have  you  the  statistics  with  you  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  When  the  Constabulary  was  organized,  the  friends  of  the 
Constabulary  force  were  very  desirous  that  it  should  be  established  on  a  firm 
footing.  They  had  a  reputation  to  establish,  and  they  wished  us  to  help  them 
establish  it.  They  sent  for  His  Honor  the  Mayor  and  myself,  to  confer  with 
them  upon  the  subject.  They  stated  that  this  force  had  been  organized  for 
the  express  purpose  of  enforcing  these  peculiar  laws — the  nuisance  law  and 
the  prohibitory  liquor  law.  They  wished  the  exclusive  privilege  of  taking  all 
the  cases  that  came  under  those  two  laws,  leaving  the  police  to  attend  to  the 
other  business.  We  were  disposed  to  give  them  an  opportunity  to  establish 
their  reputation,  and  we  agreed  that  they  should  do  that  kind  of  work,  and 
that  we  would  not  interfere  with  them,  but  would  give  them  any  assistance 
that  we  could  to  help  them  establish  their  reputation,  that  the  force  might  be 
perpetuated.  Consequently,  we  have  not  exerted  ourselves  in  the  matter,  but 
have  given  all  such  cases  to  them. 

Q.    I  mean  previous  to  that  time,  while  you  were  in  office  ? 

A.     While  I  was  in  office,  we  made  complaints  under  the  Nuisance  Act. 

Q.     How  many  complaints  ? 

A.  We  calculated  to  give  the  jury  four  or  five  cases  per  day,  during  their 
session. 

Q.    How  many  would  that  amount  to  per  year  ? 

A.    Between  four  and  five  hundred. 

Q.  I  believe  that  by  the  reports  of  the  last  three  years,  they  do  not  exceed 
in  any  year  three  hundred  ? 

A.  It  may  be  the  reports  do  not  show  all  the  complaints  ;  they  show  all 
the  arrests.  I  think  we  made  more  complaints  than  there  were  arrests. 


196  APPENDIX. 

Q.  You  may  have  made  complaints  to  the  Grand  Jury,  and  they  did  not 
find  bills  ? 

A.     Probably  that  was  so. 

Q.    Was  that  true  to  any  considerable  extent  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  it  was  to  any  great  extent,  but  I  spoke  of  it  as 
explanatory. 

Q.  Your  report,  for  the  last  three  years,  shows  that  you  have  not  made 
more  than  three  hundred  arrests  for  a  year,  although  there  were  fifteen 
hundred  or  two  thousand  known  dealers  ? 

A.  If  that  is  true,  the  reports  show  it  for  themselves;  I  have  not  £Qt 
them  here. 

Q  The  reports  show  that.  I  want  to  know  if  you  consider  that  a  serious 
effort  to  enforce  this  law  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  should  consider  it  a  serious  effort,  if  we  had  set 
ourselves  about  it.  If  we  had  had  nothing  else  to  do,  we  would  probably 
have  done  differently ;  but  we  had  a  great  many  other  cases  to  attend  to. 
The  people  make  a  great  many  complaints  against  the  police  now.  They 
complain  that  the  police  officers  are  not  seen  in  the  streets  often  enough. 
They  cannot  be  in  the  streets  and  in  court  at  the  same  time. 

Q.    How  many  police  officers  have  you  ? 

A.    We  have  now  about  two  hundred  and  seventy-one  ? 

Q.  Is  it  not  three  hundred  and  seventy-one  ?  I  think  that  three  hundred 
and  seventy-one  are  reported  ? 

A .    I  think  not ;  we  have  reduced  the  force. 

Q.    Reduced  it  since  when  ? 

A.  We  have  reduced  it  recently,  by  discharging  men  not  thought  to  be 
proper  persons  to  be  on  the  police. 

Q.    Why  have  you  not  filled  their  places  ? 

A.    His  Honor  the  Mayor  will  tell  you  the  reason. 

[Col.  KURTZ  subsequently  corrected  his  statement  by  saying  that  the 
present  number  of  the  police  force  was  271,  the  full  number  being  385.] 

Q.  You  thought  this  matter  of  so  little  consequence  compared  with  your 
other  duties,  that  with  your  whole  force  you  have  made  but  these  few  arrests  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  we  thought  it  of  no  consequence,  but  perhaps  we 
had  other  business  of  more  consequence. 

Q.  I  say  compared  with  other  things  you  had  to  do,  a  habit  that  is  beg- 
garing one-fourth  of  the  community,  taxing  people  to  a  very  great  extent, 
causing  untold  misery,  causing  the  arrest  of  fourteen  or  fifteen  thousand 
drunken  men  per  year,  is  not  of  sufficient  consequence  to  induce  the  police  to 
make  a  serious  effort  to  remove  the  evil  ? 

A.  Those  are  your  statistics,  not  mine.  I  do  not  give  as  evidence  that 
those  things  are  true. 

Q.  There  is  a  statement  in  the  Advertiser  that  there  were  14,752  arrests 
in  1866  for  drunkenness.  I  would  like  an  explanation  of  that.  I  suppose 
that  they  here  consider  as  arrested  for  drunkenness  all  those  that  have  been 
taken  up  ? 

A.  I  have  not  seen  the  article.  Perhaps  the  gentleman  who  wrote  it  can 
give  you  the  information.  We  reported  5,752  persons  as  having  been 


APPENDIX.  197 

arrested  and  sent  to  court  who  refused  to  disclose  where  they  got  their  liquor, 
and  were  fined  for  drunkenness ;  and  we  estimate  that  9,000  of  those  who 
were  reported  as  lodgers  should  be  added  to  that  number  as  being  partially 
inebriated ;  that  would  make  the  number  14,752. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  Under  your 'system  of  making  returns,  14,752 
would  be  returned  as  the  whole  number  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  that  whole  number  is  to  be  compared  with  the  whole  number 
prior  to  that  time  ? 

A.     Yes,  in  order  to  have  a  fair  comparison. 

Q-  (By  Mr.  SPOOLER.)  You  have  observed  the  operations  of  the  State 
Police,  and  know  that  there  have  been  a  great  many  convictions  obtained  by 
that  force  in  the  city  of  Boston,  and  that  seizures  have  been  made  to  a  great 
extent ;  why  did  you  not  do  the  same  thing  before  the  existence  of  the  State 
Police  ? 

A.  I  could  not  find  any  one  that  would  stand  at  my  back  and  protect  me 
if  I  did.  I  think  that  I  once  made  the  offer  to  you,  to  go  and  take  any  place 
you  would  designate,  if  you  would  agree  to  stand  at  my  back  and  protect  me 
from  any  proceedings  that  might  be  instituted.  You  declined  to  do  it,  how- 
ever. 

Q.     Do  you  think,  Colonel,  that  I  have  to  stand  behind  the  State  Police  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Why  was  it  more  necessary  for  me  to  stand  behind  you  than  to  stand 
behind  them  ? 

A.  Because  I  felt  that  I  had  given  bonds,  and  my  bondsmen  were  liable 
for  my  acts.  The  State  Police  give  bonds  to  nobody.  I  preferred  you,  or 
somebody  who  believed  in  the  law,  should  be  my  bondsman  rather  than  my 
own,  who  do  not  believe  in  the  law,  and  would  not  stand  by  me. 

Q.  You  did  not  believe  in  the  law,  and  therefore  thought  that  it  should 
not  be  executed  ? 

A.    I  did  not  believe  I  ought  to  jeopardize  my  bondsmen. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  If  you  seize  liquor  you  do  it  by  proper  legal  pro- 
cess, and  if  you  do  it  by  a  proper  legal  process  and  in  a  proper  way,  how  do 
you  incur  any  liability  ? 

A.  I  have  been  told  by  very  eminent  counsel  that  it  was  pretty  dangerous 
business,  and  that  the  least  mistake  would  make  me  liable,  and  I  did  not  like 
to  undertake  it. 

Q.  But  suppose  that  you  did  not  make  a  mistake ;  suppose  that  you  pro- 
ceeded according  to  the  law,  you  then  incurred  no  liability  ?  If  you  take  the 
process  provided  by  law  you  incur  no  personal  liability  ? 

A.     But  I  did  if  I  made  any  mistake. 

Q.  Now,  do  you  think  that  any  bond  given  by  Mr.  Spooner,  or  by  any- 
body else,  to  indemnify  you  for  doing  an  illegal  act,  would  be  of  any  value  to 
you? 

A.    1  felt  that  it  would. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     What  sort  of  a  license  law  wonld  you  have  ? 

A.  That  is  a  pretty  nice  question  ?  I  prefer  to  leave  it  to  other  gentlemen 
to  answer. 


198  .  APPENDIX. 

Q.  These  gentlemen  (the  Committee)  are  mostly  from  the  country.  The 
petitioners  ask  a  license  for  the  city,  and  chiefly  for  the  benefit  of  the  city. 
Now,  the  country  gentlemen,  I  doubt  not,  want  to  understand  the  necessity 
for  a  change,  and  what  sort  of  a  law  the  city  people  want  to  meet  their  case 
and  I  would  like  for  you  to  give  your  idea,  as  near  as  you  can,  of  what  you 
think  would  be  a  suitable  license  law. 

A.  It  is  a  matter  that  I  do  not  now  wish  to  give  my  ideas  upon.  If  the 
gentlemen  from  the  country,  when  they  are  framing  the  law,  want  to  get  any 
humble  ideas  that  I  may  have,  I  shall  be  glad  to  give  them,  but  I  do  not  want 
to  give  any  particular  ideas  now. 

Q.  The  people  seem  to  want  a  license  law,  but  none  can  tell  what  they 
want  in  a  license  law. 

A.  What  I  want  is,  that  all  evils,  of  whatever  name  or  nature,  may  be 
brought  out  to  the  view  of  the  public,  so  that  the  police,  or  anybody  else,  can 
go  in  and  see  what  is  going  on,  without  the  trouble  of  swearing  out  a  search- 
warrant.  Take  the  matter  of  pawn-brokerage,  for  instance.  Before  they 
were  licensed  the  police  could  not  find  stolen  property.  Since  they  have  been 
licensed  the  police  have  authority  to  go  in  to  their  shops,  examine  their  books 
and  anything  upon  their  premises  without  any  ceremony.  They  can  go  in  at 
any  time,  whenever  they  please.  Since  pawn-brokers  and  second-hand  dealers 
have  been  licensed,  thieves  can  no  longer  "  fence  "  stolen  property  with  them, 
but  must  carry  it  somewhere  else.  I  think  that  the  more  you  open  these 
things  to  the  public  and  to  the  police,  the  greater  is  the  advantage. 

Q.  You  are  not  prepared  to  suggest  the  details  of  what  you  would  consider 
a  proper  license  law  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  spoke  of  the  number  of  prosecutions  under 
the  Nuisance  Act.  As  the  result  of  these  prosecutions,  have  the  number  of 
nuisances  decreased  in  Boston  ? 

A.  I  think  they  have.  Whenever  we  found  that  a  place  was  a  nuisance, 
we  followed  it  up  until  it  ceased  to  be  a  nuisance. 

Q.    Do  new  nuisances  come  in  their  stead  somewhere  else  ? 

A.     Undoubtedly  they  do. 

Q.     Has  the  whole  number,  then,  been  diminished  ? 

A.    Not  to  any  great  extent. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  not  conceive  it  within  the  power  of  your 
police  to  find  sufficient  evidence  of  the  fact  of  sale,  in  any  case,  when  you 
believe  a  sale  of  liquor  exists  ? 

A.  We  never  have  had  any  difficulty  in  getting  evidence.  My  deputy  will 
tell  you  of  a  case  where  counsel  acknowledged  that  thirty  sales  were  made 
within  an  hour,  and  in  which  pay  was  received,  and  the  case  went  to  the  jury 
with  that  acknowledgment. 

Q.  I  understand  you  then,  that  it  is  practicable  to  find  evidence  against 
anybody  that  sells  ? 

A.     There  is  no  difficulty  about  that. 

Q.  Suppose  that  you  had  a  license  law,  and  one  or  two  hundred  persons 
licensed  in  this  city,  would  those  licensed  persons  be  able  to  render  yon  any 
service  in  enforcing  the  law  ? 


APPENDIX.  199 

A.    1  think  they  would. 

Q.     What  could  they  do  ? 

A.     They  would  give  us  information  that  we  could  get  nowhere  else. 

Q.     But  you  say  that  you  can  find  information  now,  without  their  aid. 

A.  I  tell  you  that  public  sentiment  would  sustain  the  law  then,  and  people 
would  have  no  sympathy  with  those  who  were  unlicensed. 

Q.  But  you  said  that  the  police  can  find  evidence  against  any  person 
suspected. 

Mr.  ANDREW.  You  misunderstood  him.  He  referred  to  places  that  had 
become  public  nuisances. 

Mr.  SPOONER.  No ;  he  said  that  the  police  could  find  evidence  against 
anybody  that  sold. 

Q.  I  ask  you  again,  if  you  were  satisfied  that  any  person  sold  liquor  in 
any  place,  if  you  could  find  sufficient  evidence  to  convict  him  ? 

A.  I  should  try.  How  I  should  succeed,  I  could  not  tell  until  I  had  tried 
it.  We  never  found  any  difficulty  in  getting  sufficient  evidence  where  there 
was  a  nuisance. 

Q.  But  where  you  believed  that  there  was  a  sale, — call  it  what  you  will — 
a  nuisance,  or  a  violation  of  the  prohibitory  law,  you  stated  a  few  moments 
ago  that  you  believed  that  you  could  get  evidence  against  anybody  that  sold. 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  did  not  testify  to  that.  You  misunderstood  me.  You  may 
have  quoted  me  so,  but  I  did  not  say  so. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  ALPHEUS  HARDY. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     You  are  one  of  the  first  petitioners,  are  you  not  ? 

A.  I  signed  one  petition.  I  do  not  know  whether  it  was  the  first  or  the 
third. 

Q.  Will  you  be  good  enough  to  state  what  it  is  that  you  desire  in  that 
petition  ? 

A.  I  desire  a  law  that  shall  command  public  respect  and  public  support, 
and  that  shall  suppress  the  sale  of  liquor  in  a  hypocritical,  hidden,  secret, 
deceptive  way. 

Q.    Will  you  tell  what  restrictions  you  would  impose  ? 

A.  I  would  not  have  any  open  bar  in  the  Commonwealth.  I  would  not 
allow  a  hotel  to  sell  a  glass  of  liquor  to  any  passer  in  the  street,  nor  to  any 
persons  except  to  guests  of  the  hotel.  If  a  guest  required  a  bottle  of  wine,  I 
would  give  him  permission  to  sell  it  under  stringent  and  healthy  restrictions. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  resided  in  Boston  ? 

A.     For  thirty-six  years. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  what  is  your  opinion,  and  from  your 
intercourse  with  the  business  men  of  Boston,  what  is  their  opinion,  as  far  as 
you  know,  of  the  present  prohibitory  liquor  law  ? 

A.  The  business  men  of  Boston,  so  far  as  I  know  them,  think  that  the 
present  prohibitory  law  is  not  productive  of  good  morals,  and  they  believe 
that  a  large  portion  of  the  illegal  sale  of  liquor  is  produced  by  orders  from 
the  country,  where  men  preach  temperance,  but  come  here  and  practise 
drunkenness. 


200  APPENDIX. 

Q.  With  regard  to  persons  who  heretofore  have  co-operated  with  you  in 
your  own  sphere  of  operation, — in  temperance  measures,  in  moral  measures 
for  the  suppression  of  intemperance,  what  is  their  present  status  ? 

A.  Formerly  the  religious  and  moral  members  of  the  community  led  the 
reform,  and  it  was  well  led.  Ministers,  members  of  churches,  well-wishers  of 
society  who  were  not  members  of  churches,  preached  temperance  and  stated 
facts,  the  results  and  misery  of  intemperance,  and  such  preaching  and  state- 
ments were  effectual;  but  since  it^is  "Be  it  enacted,"  instead  of  "Thus 
saith  the  Lord,"  a  great  many  men  have  ceased  their  efforts,  because  they 
cannot  follow  the  extreme  measures  which  they  deem  detrimental  to  the 
cause  of  temperance,  and  injudicious. 

Q  Have  you  any  facts  in  regard  to  the  feeling  of  clergymen  of  your  own 
denomination  and  of  other  denominations  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  clergyman  of  my  own  denomination,  in  the  large 
cities,  do  not  consider  the  present  prohibitory  liquor  law  as  best  adapted  to 
promote  temperance. 

Q..  Is  there  any  evidence  at  the  present  time,  of  any  change  of  public 
sentiment,  to  which  you  have  alluded,  in  regard  to  the  execution  of  the 
present  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  The  only  evidence,  and  perhaps  the  best  evidence  that  I  could  furnish, 
is  the  fact  that  several  gentlemen  who  were  in  the  Legislature  when  this 
prohibitory  law  was  enacted,  or  when  the  "  fifteen-gallon  law  "  was  enacted, 
have  said  to  me  that  they  voted  for  those  laws,  but  that  their  experience  and 
observation  since  have  taught  them  that  they  made  a  mistake,  and  they 
agreed  that  there  was  a  necessity  for  a  change,  although  they  did  not  dare 
come  out  and  say  so  for  fear  of  the  blackguardism  that  would  be  heaped  upon 
them  in  certain  circles  and  by  certain  gentlemen. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  spoke  of  worthy  clergymen  of  the  city 
formerly  leading  the  temperance  reform  ;  upon  what  basis  did  these  gentle- 
men lead  the  reform  ? 

A.  They  led  it  by  stating  facts,  by  exhibiting  the  evils  of  intemperance 
and  convincing  men  that  it  was  wise  to  be  temperate  and  correct  in  heart  and 
principle,  as  far  as  possible. 

Q.     To  be  moderate  in  the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages,  do  you  mean  ? 

A.     Some  would  say  moderation,  and  some,  total  abstinence. 

Q.  The  clergymen  you  speak  of  as  having  formerly  led  the  reform  are 
now  divided  ? 

A.  Some  go  for  total  abstinence,  and  some  for  moderation  in  the  use  of 
liquors. 

Q.  I  am  aware  that  clergymen  were  always  divided  on  that  subject,  but 
you  spoke  of  a  class  of  clergymen  who  formerly  led  the  reform,  but  have 
retired  from  the  work  since  law  has  been  employed.  I  ask  you  if  that  class 
of  clergymen  led  the  reform  on  total  abstinence  grounds,  or  upon  the  ground 
of  moderate  use. 

A.     Some  on  one  ground,  and  some  on  the  other. 

Q.  Will  you  name  one  who  stood  upon  the  total  abstinence  ground  jud 
has  retired  from  the  work  ? 


APPENDIX.  201 

A.  I  should  not  be  .willing  to  do  it  by  name  unless  compelled  by  the 
Committee. 

Q.    But  you  are  sure  that  you  know  such  men  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  the  temperance  reform,  do  you  speak  of  some 
doctrine  that  has  risen  in  later  years,  or  of  a  doctrine  that  has  been  always 
received  and  acted  upon  ? 

A.    I  speak  of  a  doctrine  as  old  as  the  Bible. 

Q.  You  speak  of  a  doctrine  which  nobody  ever  denied,  namely,  that 
people  should  not  be  drunkards  ? 

A.  That  is  a  rule  laid  down  in  the  Holy  Book,  and  I  shall  always  believe 
in  it. 

Q.  And  everybody  believes  in  it.  You  do  not  know  of  anybody  that  dis- 
believes it  ? 

A.     No,  sir.     And  I  should  be  very  sorry  to  know  of  it. 

Q.     Did  you  ever  know  of  a  liquor-dealer  who  advocated  drunkenness  ? 

A.    I  never  heard  of  one. 

Q.     Nor  of  a  drunkard  who  did  ? 

A.    I  never  heard  of  one. 

Q.  Then  the  clergymen  who  led  the  reform  stood  upon  no  other  ground 
than  that  stood  on  and  advocated  by  the  liquor-sellers  and  the  inebriates 
themselves  ? 

A.     I  cannot  speak  of  that,  sir ;  I  cannot  tell  what  they  stood  on. 

Q.  What  was  there  in  the  enactment  of  a  prohibitory  law  that  should  have 
compelled  the  clergymen  to  withdraw  from  the  field  ? 

A.  They  believed  that  the  law  was  taking  the  great  moral  question  of 
temperance  from  the  field  of  morals,  and  putting  it  in  the  field  of  law,  where 
it  did  riot  properly  belong. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  a  large  proportion  of  the  clergymen  of  your 
own  denomination,  and  others,  believing  that  the  temperance  reform  should 
be  advanced,  have  worked  all  the  more  heartily,  and  are  to-day  as  ardent, 
active  laborers  as  any  clergymen  ever  were ;  who  do  not  feel  the  law  an 
obstacle,  but,  on  the  contrary,  feel  that  it  helps  to  hold  what  shall  be  gained 
by  their  moral  efforts  ?  Are  you  not  aware  that  a  large  body  of  clergymen 
of  different  denominations,  your  own  included,  stand  in  that  position  ? 

A.     I  am  not  aware  of  it. 

Q.     You  are,  personally,  deeply  interested  in  the  temperance  reform  ? 

A.     I  am,  and  always  have  been. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  a  pledged  man,  if  I  may  ask  ? 

A.     What  do  you  mean  by  "  pledged  ?  " 

Q.     Pledged  to  total  abstinence. 

A.  Since  I  was  old  enough  to  know  what  it  meant.  I  have  never  touched 
liquor  as  a  beverage,  and  never  allowed  its  use  in  my  family. 

Q.    If  prohibition  could  be  made  and  continued  the  policy  of  the  State, 
and  the  prohibitory  law  made  effectual  in  suppressing  the  open  sale  of  liquor 
until  a  generation  should  have  grown  up  under  habits1  of  general  abstinence, 
would  you  not  think  that  a  desirable  state  of  things  had  been  achieved  ? 
26 


202  APPENDIX. 

A.  When  you  shall  produce  a  generation  that  shall  thus  abstain,  you  will 
have  accomplished  a  great  work.  . 

Q.     Do  you  not  think  it  possible  ? 

A.  Not  by  the  present  prohibitory  law.  You  have  got  to  take  hold  of  the 
hearts  and  principles  of  men  to  achieve  such  a  result. 

Q.  But  what  is  there  in  the  present  law  that  prevents  honest  laborers  from 
taking  hold  of  the  hearts  of  men  ? 

A.     Public  sentiment  is  not  yet  prepared  for  it. 

Q.  Would  you  drag  down  the  higher  elements  of  public  sentiment  to  a 
level  with  the  lower  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  hence  I  would  not  have  this  law. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  embodying  into  a  law  what  you  do  not  believe  to 
be  the  true  policy,  namely,  the  granting  or  licenses  for  the  sale  of  intoxicating 
beverages  for  the  public  good,  a  more  moral  law  in  its  influences  than  a  law 
based  upon  a  doctrine  that  you  do  recognize  ? 

A .  My  position  upon  that  question  is  this  : — We  cannot  get  present  per- 
fection, and  I  would,  therefore,  take  the  next  best  thing. 

Q.  The  Divine  law  recognizes  the  fact  that  there  is  sin  in  the  world,  but 
the  Divine  law  does  not  lower  it  ? 

A.  That  is  a  proposition  in  divinity  that  you  are  probably  better  able  to 
state  than  I  am. 

Q.  Why  should  not  human  law  imitate  the  Divine  law,  and  stand  on  the 
truth  embodied  in  it  ? 

A.  That  is  just  the  position  that  I  take, — that  we  should  imitate  the 
Divine  laws  in  our  human  laws.  I  think  that  the  Jewish  commonwealth  was 
better  governed  than  any  other  people  except  ourselves,  and  we  are 
approaching  their  government. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  desirable  to  have  the  Jewish  commonwealth  and  its 
laws,  instead  of  a  Christian  commonwealth  and  its  laws  ? 

A.     By  no  means. 

Q.     Why,  then,  did  you  adduce  that  ? 

A.  Because  the  Jewish  law  was  the  best  law  for  them,  as  they  were  then; 
but  as  they  advanced  in  Christian  liberty  and  knowledge,  the  Christian 
religion  became  a  better  law. 

Q.  Is  the  Christian  religion  a  compromise  with  evil,  as  compared  with  the 
Jewish  law  ? 

A.    By.no  means  ;  it  is  an  advance 

[Mr.  ANDREW  objected  to  further  testimony  on  this  point,  as  not  pertinent 
to  the  question  at  issue.] 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  it  is  a  desirable  state  of  things  that  a 
community  should  be  brought  to  total  abstinence  ? 

A.  Yes ;  but  I  do  not  say  that  a  man  may  not  be  an  honest  Christian  and 
yet  make  moderate  use  of  wine.  I  do  not  say  that  total  abstinence  is  a  duty 
for  everybody.  I  make  it  the  law  for  myself;  but  I  do  not  say  that  every 
man  should  make  it  the  law  for  himself. 

Q.  Turning  from  this  subject;  having  seen  your  name  connected  with  some 
business  transactions  involving  an  interest  in  this  trade,  if  it  is  agreeable  to 


APPENDIX.  203 

yourself  and  to  the  Committee,  I  should  like  to  ask  a  question  on  that  point. 
Are  you  the  lessor  of  a  place  of  business  in  which  liquor  is  sold  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  I  am  the  lessor  of  a  building  in  which  liquor  is  alleged  to  be  sold  as  a 
beverage,  but  I  do  not  know  it  as  a  fact, 

Q.     You  refer  to  what  house  ? 

Mr.  ANDREW  objected  to  the  question. 

Mr.  HARDY  asked  leave  to  make  a  personal  explanation  in  reply  to  the 
question. 

Mr.  ALDRICH.  Since  the  question  has  been  asked,  the  Committee  think  it 
proper,  if  Mr.  Hardy  so  desires,  that  he  should  have  an  opportunity  to  explain 
his  exact  position  in  respect  to  this  matter. 

Mr.  HARDY.  I  have  been  in  business  for  myself,  in  Boston,  some  thirty- 
three  years.  During  tha't  time  I  have  always  refused  to  let  any  building  for 
the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors.  I  am  one  of  three  trustees  of  an  estate  that 
purchased  the  Tremont  House  at  auction.  We  leased  the  building  for  hotel 
purposes,  putting  the  lessee  under  an  agreement  to  commit  no  nuisance,  nor 
transact  any  illegal  business.  More  than  that  I  had  no  right  to  demand, 
and  was  not  called  upon  to  do  more.  I  understand  that  the  reverend  gentle- 
man before  me,  (Dr.  Miner,)  from  his  pulpit,  and  the  gentleman  upon  his  left, 
(Mr.  Spooner,)  in  an  adjoining  hall,  and  sundry  other  gentlemen  in  the  Com- 
monwealth, have  stated  what  is  simply  untrue  :  that  I  owned  that  building, 
and  received  an  income  of  $15,000  per  year  therefrom.  If  I  am  wrong,  I 
beg  to  be  corrected. 

Mr.  MINER.     So  far  as  I  am  concerned,  the  statement  is  totally  wrong. 

Mr.  SPOONER.  The  only  statement  that  I  have  made  is,  that  Mr.  Hardy 
was  one  of  the  trustees  of  the  Sears  estate  that  owned  the  Tremont  House ; 
that  it  was  let  for  a  fyotel,  and  that  a  grog-shop  was  kept  in  it.  I  never  inti- 
mated that  Mr.  Hardy  had  any  personal  interest  in  the  matter.  I  was  very 
careful  upon  that  subject. 

Mr.  HARDY.  I  wish  still  further  to  state,  that  I  have  no  pecuniary  interest 
in  the  property.  My  compensation,  as  chairman  of  the  trustees  of  the  estate, 
does  not  depend  at  all  upon  the  Tremont  House,  but  would  remain  the  same 
if  the  house  were  sold. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Are  you  the  chief  administrator  upon  that  estate  ? 

A.    I  am. 

Q.  Do  the  other  gentlemen,  acting  as  trustees,  receive  the  same  compensa- 
tion as  yourself? 

A.  That  is  a  business  matter.  If  you  will  come  into  my  office  I  will 
explain  it. 

Q.  You  rely  upon  the  provisions  of  your  lease,  that  the  place  should  be 
used  in  accordance  with  the  laws  of  the  State  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Did  you  feel  that  in  that  lease  you  had 

Mr.  ANDREW.  I  object  to  this  question.  It  does  not  interest  the  Com- 
monwealth of  Massachusetts  to  know  how  a  man  feels.  The  question  before 
us  is,  What  shall  the  legislature  of  Massachusetts  do  in  respect  to  a  system  of 
legislation  of  great  importance  ?  I  have  the  utmost  respect  and  personal 
regard  for,  and  confidence  in  Mr.  Hardy.  I  think  it  was  but  just  in  the 


204  APPENDIX. 

Committee  to  give  him  an  opportunity  to  make  an  explanation,  which  he  was 
goaded  into  making  by  the  unjust  aspersions — of  whom,  I  will  not  say.  The** 
explanation  has  been  offered,  and  a  disavowal  made  on  the  other  side. 
Beyond  that,  the  public  have  no  concern,  and  I  object  to  our  being  farther 
delayed  by  questions  relating  to  mere  business  matters. 

Mr.  MINER.  The  chief  point  of  interest  here,  is  the  point  of  feeling, 
of  conviction.  Gentlemen  are  called  here  in  grand  array,  to  say  what  they 
think,  and  how  they  feel,  and  what  they  hope  for,  under  some  as  yet  undefined 
law.  It  is  a  matter  of  some  importance,  in  order  to  judge  of  the  value  of 
opinions,  and  feelings,  to  know  precisely  the  stand-point  and  principles  of 
action  of  the  gentlemen  who  thus  testify.  I  do  by  no  means  impugn  the 
motives  of  anybody.  I  ask  no  questions  that  are  not  believed  to  have  the 
effect  of  exhibiting  the  surroundings,  and  presenting*  a  proper  back-ground, 
on  which  may  fall  the  light  of  their  opinion  that  the  picture  presented,  may 
be  clear,  open  and  frank.  The  question  I  desired  to  ask  was,  whether  it  was 
his  belief,  in  leasing  the  property,  that  it  would  not  be  used  in  the  sale 
of  intoxicating  liquors  ?  If  the  question  is  deemed  improper,  I  do  not  desire 
to  urge  it. 

Mr.  ALDRICH.  The  Committee  think  that  Mr.  Hardy  has  stated  frankly 
and  fully  his  relation  to  this  matter ;  that  the  exact  position  he  holds  is  now 
known,  and  that  to  go  into  an  examination  of  his  feelings  on  the  subject, 
would  be  hardly  profitable  nor  proper. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Much  stress  has  been  laid  upon  the  taking  of 
liquors  home,  and  their  secret  sale  and  use.  If  I  understand  you,  under  the 
license  law  that  you  suggest,  all  the  liquor  that  old  topers  have  shall  be 
taken  to  their  homes  ? 

A.    I  said  nothing  of  the  kind. 

Q.    You  said  that  you  would  suppress  open  bars  everywhere  ? 

A.    I  would. 

Q.    How  then  would  you  do  ? 

A.  I  would  let  people  go  without.  If  you  went  to  a  hotel,  you  might 
drink  a  glass  of  wine,  or  a  bottle  of  wine,  if  you  pleased. 

Q.    You  would  not  have  liquor  served  to  citizens,  but  only  to  guests  ? 

A.    No,  sir  ;  I  do  not  think  that  it  is  the  business  of  a  hotel  to  keep  a  bar. 

Q.  Then,  so  far  as  the  citizens  are  concerned,  if  they  would  drink,  they 
must  keep  the  liquor  at  their  homes  ? 

A.    That  is  a  private  matter  that  I  would  leave  them  to  act  upon. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  FAY.)  You  are  a  practical  man,  and,  undoubtedly,  like 
practical  questions.  I  look  upon  this  examination  as  a  discussion  between 
two  classes  of  temperance  men  ;  one  class  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory  law,  and 
the  other  in  favor  of  a  license  law.  We  have  asked  several  gentlemen,  who 
came  before  the  Committee,  to  give  a  definite  idea  of  what  kind  of  a  law  they 
would  have,  but  have  not  been  able  generally  to  get  much  of  an  answer.  The 
most  of  them  decline  to  give  their  opinion.  You  have  said  that  you  would 
not  have  an  open  bar,  but  that  you  would  allow  hotels  to  sell  to  their  guests, 
and  to  no  one  else.  Would  you  allow  eating-houses  to  sell  liquor  to  persons 
to  be  drank  upon  their  premises  ? 

A.    No,  sir;  I  would  not. 


APPENDIX.  205 

Q.  Would  you  allow  grocers  to  sell  liquor  to  be  drank  upon  their 
premises  ? 

A.  I  have  not  given  the  subject  sufficient  consideration  to  frame  a  bill, 
but  I  shall  be  perfectly  satisfied  as  a  friend  of  temperance,  (which  I  am,  and 
know  no  other  interest,  nor  represent  any  other  interest  here,)  with  any  law, 
and  will  aid  in  enforcing  any  law,  which  this  honorable  Committee,  after 
having  heard  all  the  evidence  on  the  subject,  shall  give  us. 

Q.  You  said  you  would  not  license  eating-houses  to  furnish  liquor  to  be 
drank  on  the  premises,  and  yet  you  hesitate  to  say  that  you  would  not  allow 
grocers  thus  to  sell  ? 

A.  No,  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that.  I  do  not  know  how  far  I  would 
be  willing  to  farry  that  point.  I  should  want  the  licenses  to  be  very  few  and 
very  carefully  guarded, — as  carefully  as  it  is  possible  for  human  wisdom  to 
guard  them.  I  should  also  want  the  law  to  accord  with  public  sentiment,  so 
that  you  could  have  with  the  law  the  public  sentiment  to  execute  it. 

TESTIMONY  OF  E.  HASKETT  DERBY. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  You  have  been  a  temperance  man  for  a  great 
many  years  ? 

A.     For  forty  years. 

Q.     Have  you  ever  been  a  traveller  abroad  ? 

A.    I  have  been  twice  to  Europe. 

Q.     How  long  a  time  did  you  spend  abroad  ? 

A .  On  the  first  occasion,  a  brief  period  of  sixty  days ;  upon  the  second, 
rather  more  than  four  months. 

Q.    When  were  you  last  in  Europe  V 

A.    In  the  early  part  of  1864. 

Q.  Did  you  have  any  occasion  to  observe  the  habits  of  the  people  of 
European  countries — in  vine-growing  and  wine-drinking  regions — in  respect 
to  temperance  or  intemperance  ?  If  so,  I  wish  you  would  be  kind  enough  to 
state  what  you  have  observed,  and  the  results  at  which  you  have  arrived,  as 
briefly  as  possible,  and  in  your  own  way  ? 

A.  My  first  visit  to  Europe  was  in  1843.  On  that  occasion  I  landed  in 
England,  and  after  remaining  for  a  short  time  in  London,  crossed  to  Paris. 
We  landed  at  Dieppe  in  the  morning,  and,  in  company  with  a  friend,  took 
our  breakfast.  The  first  sight  that  greeted  my  eyes  was  a  party  of  French 
people — a  gentleman,  his  wife  and  children,  some  lads  of  twelve  or  fifteen, 
and  some  young  ladies — taking  their  breakfast.  We  called  for  coffee,  rolls, 
and  butter.  The  French  family  were  breakfasting  on  claret  and  bread  and 
butter,  using  claret  instead  of  coffee.  The  French  drink  claret  as  we  drink 
coffee,  and  I  observed  that  they  were  as  healthy  in  appearance  as  other  people. 
That  was  the  first  intimation  I  had  of  French  custom  and  French  manners. 
This  custom  was  something  new  to  me,  and  attracted  my  attention ;  but  I 
afterwards  found,  in  travelling  through  France,  that  claret  was  there  used  as 
we  use  water. 

Q.  Give  your  observation  of  the  apparent  effect,  if  any,  of  this  habit  of 
drinking  wine,  as  a  beverage,  upon  the  morality  of  the  people  ? 


206  APPENDIX. 

A.  During  both  of  my  visits  to  Europe— and  I  passed  into  Italy  on  my 
second  visit — I  do  not  remember  to  have  seen  a  single  case  of  intoxication. 
I  certainly  saw  more  intoxication  in  one  month  after  my  return  than  I  did 
during  the  six  months  of  my  absence  in  Europe. 

Q.     After  your  return  to  Boston  ? 

A.     After  my  return  to  Boston. 

Q.  How  extensively  did  this  habit  prevail  among  the  people  of  common 
means  and  simple  manners — the  habit  of  using  wine  as  a  daily  beverage,  and 
with  their  food '? 

A.  In  passing  through  the  streets  of  Paris,  I  noticed  little  shops  where  the 
wine  was  sold.  I  found  that  it  was  the  common  beverage  of  the  people,  and 
that  it  could  be  obtained  at  a  cost  of  three  or  four  cents  per  tumbler-full. 

Q.     Did  you  go  into  Italy  ? 

A.  I  went  to  Italy,  and  observed  the  same  thing  there.  In  dining  there — 
at  a  hotel  in  Italy — a  piece  of  bread  is  placed  beside  your  plate,  and  a  bottle 
of  claret.  The  claret  is  quite  as  common  as  the  bread.  I  found  this  the 
case  at  Nice,  at  Naples,  at  Rome,  and  at  Florence.  No  extra  charge  is  made 
for  it.  Perhaps  the  wine  is  not  always  the  best  the  country  affords  ;  if  you 
want  better,  you  can  call  for  it.  I  remember  once  meeting  an  intelligent 
laborer  in  the  neighborhood  of  Milan,  who  was  conversant  with  several  lan- 
guages, and  I  asked  him  what  his  wages  were.  He  said  they  were  a  sum 
equivalent  to  eighty  cents  per  day.  I  asked  him  why  he  did  not  go  to 
America.  I  told  him  that  his  ability  to  speak  several  languages  would  secure 
him  a  position  where  he  could  get  six  or  eight  hundred  dollars  per  year.  He 
asked  me  if  he  could  get  his  wine.  I  inquired  why  he  wanted  wine.  He 
said  that  he  could  not  dispense  with  the  light  wine  of  his  cpuntry  ;  that  he 
could  dispense  with  meat  much  better  than  with  wine.  I  think  that  the  use  of 
light  wines  is  habitual.  I  remember  crossing  the  Mediterranean  Sea,  to 
Corsica  and  Elba,  in  the  month  of  January.  The  weather  was  cold,  and 
there  were  no  fires  in  the  cabin.  Breakfast  was  served  at  ten  o'clock,  and  it 
seemed  to  me  rather  an  inhospitable  breakfast,  with  neither  coffee  nor  tea, 
but  there  was  plenty  of  claret  on  the  table,  and  was  the  only  beverage 
given  us. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  this  habitual  use  of  wine  on  the  people  of  Italy, 
as  respects  intemperance,  when  compared  with  the  results  of  liquor-drinking, 
as  you  have  observed  them,  on  the  people  of  the  United  States  ? 

A.  I  saw  no  such  effects.  You  see  more  in  one  visit  to  our  police  court, 
of  the  effects  of  liquor,  than  you  can  see  in  all  Europe,  according  to  my 
experience. 

Q.  Passing  from  that  topic,  have  you  had  any  occasion  to  study  and 
investigate  the  effect  produced  upon  the  consumption  of  spirituous  liquors  by 
prohibition,  or  by  restricting  its  sale  by  taxation  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  was  requested  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to  aid  the 
Revenue  Commission  in  investigating  two  or  three  questions, — one  was  in 
respect  to  cotton,  and  another  in  respect  to  spirits.  I  studied  both  subjects. 
I  came  to  the  conclusion  that  a  tax  of  two  dollars  per  gallon  on  spirituous 
liquors  was  nearly  equivalent  to  a  prohibition  of  its  sale ;  that  it  prohibited, 
to  a  very  great  extent,  the  manufacture  of  the  article,  and  that  it  destroyed 


APPENDIX.  207 

the  revenue  of  the  country.  The  Revenue  Commission,  who  at  first  were  in 
favor  of  the  tax,  after  listening  to  the  argument  that  I  submitted,  came  to  the 
conclusion  that  the  tax  of  two  dollars  per  gallon  should  not  be  enforced,  and 
have  since  endeavored  to  satisfy  Congress  that  that  tax  was  a  mistake. 

Q.  Although  the  tax  seems  adapted  to  produce  a  prohibition,  what  is  the 
effect  actually  produced  ? 

A .  The  effect  of  such  a  tax,  in  the  first  place,  is  to  destroy  the  use  of 
spirituous  liquors  in  the  arts,  which  is  a  matter  of  interest  to  all.  More  than 
one-half  of  the  alcohol  manufactured  was  used  in  the  arts.  It  was  used  as  a 
burning  fluid  to  a  considerable  extent.  It  was  used  in  the  manufacture  of 
various  articles.  Its  use  in  the  arts  has  been  almost  prohibited.  I  think  that 
the  tax  of  two  dollars  per  gallon  has  caused  a  loss  to  the  revenue  of  the 
country  of  from  two  to  three  hundred  millions  of  dollars. 

Q.  I  will  not  inquire  into  the  effect  produced  upon  the  revenue  of  the 
United  States,  but  of  the  effect  of  legislation  amounting,  in  its  tendency,  to 
a  prohibition.  What  has  experience  proved  in  respect  to  the  actual  reduc- 
tion of  its  consumption  in  the  country  ?  The  revenue  returns  will  show  one 
thing  in  regard  to  the  United  States  Treasury;  what  do  the  facts  of  history 
show  in  regard  to  the  actual  production  and  consumption  ? 

Mr.  JEWELL.  That  is  to  say,  does  this  prohibitory  duty  decrease  the 
manufacture? 

A.  For  the  purposes  of  drinking,  it  has  not  reduced  the  manufacture.  It 
has,  however,  reduced  the  purity  of  the  article.  I  believe  that  as  much,  or 
more,  is  drank  to-day  than  was  consumed  in  1859. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  Are  there  any  statistics  that  will  show  the  pro- 
duction of  contraband  liquors  ? 

A.  Nothing  definite.  That  is  done  secretly  in  cellars,  &c.  The  only 
thing  that  shows  it  is  the  increase  in  the  business  of  the  coppersmiths.  They 
are  unwilling  to  tell  to  whom  they  sell,  but  there  is  a  wonderful  increase  in 
their  business  throughout  the  country. 

Q.  Have  you  observed  any  estimate,  either  made  by  the  Internal  Revenue 
Department,  or  by  the  Committee  of  Ways  and  Means,  of  the  actual  pro- 
duction of  whiskey  for  the  purposes  of  beverage,  during  the  last  year  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  I  have  seen  the  more  recent  estimate.  The  last 
estimate  I  noticed  was  somewhere  from  forty  to  fifty  millions  of.  gallons 
for  beverages.  On  the  return  'for  duty,  the  amount  is  only  fourteen  or  fifteen 
millions  of  gallons,  in  place  of  the  ninety-two  or  ninety-three  millions 
returned  in  1859. 

Q.  Did  you  observe  the  recent  speech  of  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee 
of  Ways  and  Means,  in  the  House  of  Representatives,  in  which  he  states  the 
fact  that  the  revenue  derived  from  the  tax  of  two  dollars  per  gallon  had  been 
but  twenty-nine  millions  of  dollars,  whereas,  if  there  had  been  an  honest 
return,  it  would  have  yielded  a  revenue  of  ninety  millions  of  dollars  ? 

A.-    I  saw  his  statement,  and  have  no  doubt  that  it  is  correct. 

Q.  Therefore,  has  the  effect  been  other  than  this  :  to  drive  honest  distillers 
out  of  the  market,  and  to  place  the  business  in  the  hands  of  dishonest  men, 
who  carry  it  on  in  a  contraband  way  ? 

A.    That  has  been  the  effect. 


208  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Do  you  perceive  any  real  difference  between  the  effect  of  a  law  pro- 
hibiting the  sale  of  liquor,  and  the  effect  of  a  law  practically  prohibiting  its 
production  ? 

A.    The  effect  is  the  same. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  you  saw  no 
drunkenness  in  Italy  ? 

A.    I  do  not  remember  a  single  case. 

Q.  Did  your  travels  at  any  time  lead  you  to  think  of  the  subject  of  intem- 
perance while  in  the  suburbs  of  any  of  the  large  cities  such  as  Paris,  Lyons, 
Marseilles  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  in  Paris ;  and  should  have  noticed  it  if  it  had  been  common. 
I  noticed  the  appearance  of  general  health, — an  appearance  as  if  they  did 
not  drink  at  all.  I  did  not  see  the  pallid  faces  that  I  see  at  home. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  there  is  any  analogy  between  the  climates  of  those 
countries,  and  our  own  severer  climate  ?  Is  it  possible  to  conduct  our  social 
regulations  upon  such  principles  as  would  be  desirable  were  our  climate  like 
theirs  ? 

Q.  I  think  that  the  climate  of  the  north  of  France  is  not  dissimilar  to 
that  of  Rhode  Island,  Connecticut,  and  portions  of  Massachusetts.  The  cli- 
mate may  be,  perhaps,  a  little  milder.  I  see  no  difficulty  in  that  respect. 

Q.    Do  you  deem  it  practicable,  to  ripen  the  grape  in  New  England  ? 

A.  I  do.  I  have  seen  wine  made  from  New  England  grapes.  I  think 
that  in  this  country,  in  time,  we  shall  have  an  abundance  of  wine.  I  think  it 
will  be  a  great  blessing  when  it  comes.  My  remedy  for  drunkenness  would 
be  the  introduction  of  those  light  wines.  In  Norway  they  have  cured  intem- 
perance by  introducing  the  light  wines  of  France. 

Q.    Has  the  attempt  to  introduce  wine  into  Scotland  ever  been  made  ? 

A.  I  have  seen  it  stated  that  in  ancient  times  claret  was  used  as  a  bever- 
age in  Scotland,  and  that  they  were  more  temperate  then  than  now. 

Q.  Do  you  rest  that  statement  upon  any  well  verified  statistics,  or  upon 
general  facts  ? 

A.  I  learn  it  from  the  books  of  travellers.  In  regard  to  Norway,  we  have 
the  testimony  of  Sir  Morton  Peto.  He  recommends  the  introduction  of  claret 
wine  as  a  cure  for  intemperance. 

Q.    Your  position,  then,  touching  prohibition,  is,  that  it  is  impracticable  ? 

A.    I  think  it  impossible  as  well  as  impracticable. 

Q.  You  do  not  mean  that  the  prohibition  of  the  open  sale  of  liquor  is 
impossible  or  impracticable  ? 

A.    I  do  not  mean  that ;  I  mean  that  it  is  impossible  to  prevent  the  sale. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  manufacture  and  the  sale  would  be  as  great 
under  a  prohibition  as  under  an  open  sale  ? 

A.  I  fear  that  it  would  be  larger.  It  was  larger  in  London  under  a  pro- 
hibitive law  than  it  ever  was  before  or  since. 

Q.  Did  liquor-dealers  there  desire  a  change  in  the  law  that  would  restrict 
the  manufacture  ? 

A.  I  have  an  extract  from  a  book  which  I  will  read,  and  will  give  a  better 
answer  to  your  question  than  anything  I  can  say : — 


APPENDIX.  209 

"In  1737  a  duty  equal  to  ^i.81  per  gallon  was  imposed  on  spirits,  in  Great 
Britain,  and  the  sale  of  all  quantities  less  than  two  gallons  was  interdicted. 
A  fine  of  £100  was  also  imposed  on  all  who  violated  the  law  by  a  sale  of 
spirit.  '  Respectable  dealers  withdrew  from  the  trade  proscribed  by  Parli- 
ament, and  the  business  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  lowest  and  most  profligate 
characters.  The  people  espoused  the  cause  of  the  smugglers,  and  informers 
were  hunted  down  like  wild  animals,  officers  of  the.revenue  were  assailed  in 
the  streets,  and  drunkenness,  disorder  and  crime  increased  with  frightful 
rapidity.'  In  two  years  twelve  thousand  people  were  arrested  in  London  for 
offences  against  the  law.  But  neither  revenue  officers  nor  magistrates  could 
stop  the  torrent  of  smuggling.  Seven  millions  of  gallons  were  annually  sold 
in  London,  and  its  environs  alone,  as  much  as  paid  duty  in  -all  England 
before  the  adoption  of  the  law.  After  two  years'  struggle  the  Government 
gave  up  'the  contest,  and  repealed  the  law.  A  check  was  instantly  given 
to  smuggling,  and  if  the  vice  of  drunkenness  was  not  materially  diminished, 
it  has  never  been  stated  that  it  was  increased." 

This  is  from  " McCulloch,  on  Taxation" 

Q.  I  do  not  discover  an  answer  to  my  question,  which  is,  whether  the  liquor 
manufacturers  and  traffickers  of  London,  during  that  period  when  their  sales 
were  greatest,  asked  a  change  of  the  law  that  would  restrict  them  ? 

A.  I  understand  that  a  change  was  demanded  by  the  community,  including 
them. 

Q.  But  this  law  produced  smuggling.  Smuggling,  of  course,  would  restrict 
home  manufacture  ? 

A.  "  The  people,"  is  the  expression, — the  whole  community, — "espoused 
the  cause  of  the  smugglers." 

Q.  The  question  is,  whether  the  liquor  manufacturers  and  dealers  of 
London  asked  a  change  that  would  restrict  their  own  business  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  anything  further  about  that  than  what  I  have  read. 

Q.  If  it  is  proper,  I  would  like  to  ask  you  this  practical  question,  touching 
our  own  home  affairs :  Why,  if  the  demand  and  manufacture  of  liquor  is 
likely  to  be  greater  under  a  suppression  of  open  sale,  our  manufacturers  and 
dealers  ask  a  change  in  the  law, — why  do  they  ask  a  license  law  that  shall  be 
stringently  restrictive  ? 

A.  I  am  unable  to  answer  that  question,  as  I  have  never  conferred  with 
the  liquor-dealers. 

Q.     Are  you  not  aware  that  they  are  among  the  petitioners  ? 

A.    I  have  not  read  the  names  attached  to  any  of  the  petitions. 

Q.     What  would  you  recommend  in  place  of  the  existing  law  ? 

A.  In  the  first  place,  I  would  recommend  a  repeal  of  the  duty  upon  the 
light  wines  of  France.  I  would  recommend  encouragement  of  the  growth  of 
the  grape,  so  that  every  man  should  live  "  under  his  own  vine  and  fig  tree." 
We  have  undertaken  to  get  rid  of  the  destruction  that  wasteth  at  noon-day. 
I  claim  to  be  somewhat  of  a  temperance  man,  and  would  put  down  intemper- 
ance if  I  could  do  it  judiciously ;  but  I  believe  that  the  destruction  that 
wasteth  at  noon-day  is  a  pestilence  that  walketh  in  darkness.  We  have  driven 
liquor  into  the  holes  and  the  cellars.  The  illicit  distiller  confederates  with 
the  illicit  seller.  I  would  bring  the  whole  traffic  out  into  the  daylight.  I 
27 


210  APPENDIX. 

would  license  the  sale  of  spirits.  I  would  deal  with  it  as  with  one  of  the 
elements.  A  question  has  been  asked  about  children.  We  put  a  curb  around 
a  well  to  keep  children  out  of  it,  but  we  do  not  deny  them  the  use  of  the 
water  because  a  child  might  drown  in  the  well.  We  put  a  fender  around  the 
fire  to  keep  a  child  out  of  it,  but  do  not  deny  it  the  warmth. 

Q.     Then  you  would  give  a  child  liquor  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.    No,  sir.    I  would  have  a  fender. 

Q.     That  is,  prohibition  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  not  prohibition.  If  I  thought  it  desirable  that  the  child 
should  have  more  warmth  he  should  have  it  under  my  aid  and  guidance.  I 
assume  that  every  man  has  the  right  to  regulate  his  own  diet,  but  I  would  try 
to  guide  the  appetite  and  to  correct  the  taste.  When  you  deal  with  the  man 
who  sells  liquor,  you  do  not  effect  the  desire,  the  appetite  for  drink,  nor  cor- 
rect the  taste.  If  you  punish  one  man  for  selling,  you  do  not  get  ritl  of  the 
appetite.  The  purchaser  can  go  to  another  seller  to  gratify  his  appetite.  I 
would  correct  the  taste. 

Q.  Allow  me  to  ask  if  that  manner  of  reasoning  docs  not  involve  the 
necessary  nurture  of  the  appetite  by  moderate  drinking,  and  if  your  license 
law  restrains  a  seller  from  selling  to  a  man  whose  appetite  has  become  strong 
would  he  not  turn  to  some  secret  place  to  purchase  ? 

.4.  I  think  not.  I  would  have  a  license  law  and  I  would  also  have  an 
inspector  of  liquors.  The  claret,  the  light  wines,  the  brandy  sold  should  be 
perfectly  pure.  A  man  would  then  not  go  to  secret  places  to  obtain  his 
liquor,  because  he  would  find  poison  there.  I  consider  the  liquors  now  sold 
as  poisonous.  Let  me  give  you  an  instance.  A  friend  of  mine  sometime 
since  brought  a  suit,  and  attached  a  stock  of  liquor.  The  party  upon  the 
other  side,  moved  that  the  liquor  be  sold  at  auction.  Objection  was  made  to 
the  immediate  sale,  because  the  liquor  would  improve  by  keeping.  The 
other  parties  said  that  the  liquor  was  impure  and  would  spoil  in  six  months 
and  therefore  had  better  be  sold  at  once.  In  secret  places  I  should  expect 
to  get  that  kind  of  an  article  but  under  a  proper  inspection  and  in  public 
places  I  should  expect  to  get  a  pure  article. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  or  not  there  are  any  laws  respecting  the 
purity  of  liquor  and  requiring  an  inspection  ? 

A.     I  believe  there  are  such  laws  but  the  matter  is  neglected. 

Q.     Why  do  not  temperance  men  move  in  that  matter  ? 

A.   '1  think  it  is  time  that  they  did. 

Q.     You  are  one  of  them  ? 

A.  But  I  have  not  taken  an  active  part  in  the  campaign.  I  have  had 
other  duties  to  perform. 

Q.  I  will  ask  you  this  question,  whether  the  character  of  the  business  of 
which  you  have  just  spoken  would  be  made  either  more  or  less  respectable  by 
a  law  that  should  protect  the  seller  in  a  traffic  for  the  public  good  ? 

A.  I  think  it  would  be  made  more  respectable,  and  that  is  what  I  wish. 
If  liquor  is  to  be  sold  I  would  have  it  sold  by  people  of  responsibility. 

Q.     Would  the  patronage  of  such  places  be  more  respectable  than  now  ? 


APPENDIX.  211 

A.  I  do  not  know  sir.  You  now  virtually  say  to  a  man  that  he  shall  not 
drink.  The  law  prohibits  the  sale.  If  no  one  can  legally  sell,  then  the  man 
who  buys  is  in  complicity  with  the  man  who  sells,  in  a  violation  of  the  law. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  then  to  say  that  licensing  the  traffic  would 
probably  make  it  more  respectable  ? 

A.     I  think  it  would  tend  to. 

Q.  But  would  making  the  trafficking  and  the  use  of  liquor  more  respectable 
tend  to  diminish  the  traffic  and  use  ? 

A.  To  some  extent  I  think  it  would,  for  when  you  say  to  a  man  that  he 
shall  not  have  a  particular  thing,  he  naturally  says  he  will  have  it. 

Q.  Very  well  then,  granting  that  when  you  say  to  a  man  that  he  shall 
not  have  liquor  he  naturally  says  that  he  will  have  it,  so  when  you  say  to  a 
man,  "  You  shall  not  commit  adultery,"  he  says,  "  I  will,"  would  you  therefore 
abolish  the  law  against  adultery  ? 

A.  Oh,  no.  In  the  first  case  it  is  the  mere  saying  so,  that  makes  the 
drinking  an  offence.  Adultery  is  a  very  different  offence. 

Q.  Do  you  not  recognize  a  habit,  the  evils  of  which  are  so  widely  preva- 
lent and  so  universally  felt,  as  an  offence  against  good  order  ? 

A.  The  misery  and -evils  resulting  from  the  habit  are  not  I  think  in  con- 
sequence of  the  use  of  liquor,  but  from  the  use  of  adulterated  liquor. 

Q.    How  long  has  this  practice  of  adulterating  liquors  been  in  vogue  ? 

A.  Ever  since  the  days  of  Addison,  two  centuries  ago,  and  I  do  not  know 
how  much  earlier. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  there  was  any  less  drunkenness,  comparatively,  in 
Addison's  time  than  now  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know. 

Q.     There  is  an  excise  or  license  law  in  New  York,  I  believe  ? 

A.     There  is. 

Q.     Is  the  quality  of  liquors  better  in  New  York  than  in  Massachusetts  ? 

A.     I  am  not  able  to  tell  that. 

Q.    Do  you  suspect  or  believe  that  it  is  ? 

A.     I  think  it  is. 

Q.     Why  do  you  think  so  ? 

A.  I  think  so  from  conversations  that  I  have  had  with  friends ;  although  I 
think,  that  under  the  present  tax  of  two  dollars  per  gallon,  very  little  pure 
liquor  is  to  be  found  in  the  country.  We  had  before  the  Revenue  Commis- 
sion a  chemist  who  estimated  that  the  liquor  now  sold  was  five  parts  pure  and 
twenty  parts  impure. 

Q.  I  understand  why  you  would  use  a  fender  to  keep  your  child  out  of 
the  fire,  and  I  understand  why  you  would  not  allow  the  liquor-seller  to  sell  to 
him.  Would  you  give  liquor  to  your  child  yourself? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Then  I  do  not  understand  your  illustration  of  the  fender  which  permits 
him  to  receive  some  of  the  warmth,  at  the  same  time  keeping  the  child  out  of 
the  fire  ? 

'A.  It  was  in  reply  to  a  question  asked  of  another  witness  that  I  used  that 
illustration.  My  idea  was  that  I  would  deal  with  spirits  as  I  would  with  the 
element  of  fire,  which  does  great  mischief  when  unguarded.  I  might,  perhaps 


212  APPENDIX. 

let  my  cLild  burn  his  fingers  a  little,  to  teach  him  that  he  ought  not  to  go  into 
it ;  but  I  would  guard  against  his  falling  into  the  fire. 

Q.     That  is,  you  would  not  give  your  child  any  liquor  as  a  beverage  ? 

A .     I  think  not. 

Q.    Why  not,  if  it  is  a  good  ? 

A.  I  have  not  said  that  it  was  a  good.  I  do  believe,  however,  that  there 
are  certain  parties  who  require  it.  I  believe  that  a  little  claret  wine  or  ale> 
in  certain  conditions  of  the  system,  promotes  health. 

Q.     Are  those  conditions  such  as  to  make  wine  or  ale  strictly  medicinal  ? 

A.     Not  strictly  medicinal, — alimentary. 

Q.     As  food? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Is  alcohol,  in  any  preparation,  food  for  the  human  system  ? 

A.  I  believe  that  the  light  wines,  as  used  in  Europe,  are  to  a  great  extent 
a  substitute  for  food.  I  believe  that  the  quantity  of  wine  used  in  France 
averages  nearly  a  bottle  per  day  for  every  inhabitant. 

Q.  Do  your  New  York  friends  have  any  difficulty  in  finding  satisfactory 
liquor  in  Boston  ? 

A.     That  I  am  unable  to  say. 

Q.  You  have  no  definite  data,  then,  upon  which  to  stand  in  saying  that 
the  liquors  sold  in  New  York  are  better  than  those  sold  in  Boston — nothing 
more  than  the  general  suggestions  of  friends  ? 

A.  My  friends,  when  they  want  a  good,  pure  article  of  wine,  are  apt  to 
send  to  New  York  for  it. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  great  deal  more  liquor  sold  as  wine  in  this  country  than 
is  really  imported  into  the  country  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  there  is  a  great  manufactory  of  champagne  in  New  Jersey.  I 
anderstand  that  the  principal  part  of  it  is  manufactured  in  New  Jersey. 

Q.     Is  there  any  pure  wine  imported  into  this  country  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  that  there  is.  Claret  is  furnished  in  Europe  at  a  cost 
from  three  to  five  cents  per  bottle,  and  a  great  deal  of  it  is  imported  here  in 
bottles. 

Q.  Is  there  any  wine  imported  into  this  country  that  has  not  undergone 
enforcement  ? 

A.  I  believe  they  do  put  alcohol  in  the  lowest  grades  of  wine  to  enable 
them  to  bear  the  voyage. 

Q.     Is  not  that  almost  universally  true  of  imported  wine  ? 

A.  I  have  not  been  in  the  trade,  but  I  have  heard  it  remarked  that  such 
wine  required  a  little  enforcement  to  cross  the  ocean.  I  believe  that  in  claret 
wine  there  is  only  about  8  per  cent,  of  alcohol.  It  is  about  the  strength  of 
cider ;  perhaps  hardly  so  strong. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  consider  that  the  use  of  those  light  wines 
has  a  tendency  to  create  an  appetite  for  stronger  drinks  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  but  the  contrary.  In  France  there  are  one  hundred  gallons  of 
wine  sold  to  one  of  brandy  or  spirits,  and  that  one  is  used  principally  in  the 
arts.  I  think,  in  drinking,  the  ratio  is  two  hundred  of  wine  to  one  of  brandy. 


APPENDIX.  213 

Q:  You  spoke  of  the  prohibition  of  the  sale  as  not  removing  the  appetite 
for  liquor.  Is  it  not  true  that  no  criminal  law  removes  the  occasion  of  trans-, 
gression — the  temptation  ? 

A.  I  have  not  reflected  sufficiently  to  answer  that  question  satisfactorily 
to  myself. 

I  was  asked  the  question  what  kind  of  a  law  I  would  have.  My  idea  is  to 
have  a  license  law ;  to  have  a  heavy  charge,  perhaps  of  one  or  two  hundred 
dollars  for  a  license,  and  an  equal  or  greater  sum  deposited  to  be  forfeited  in 
case  of  improper  conduct  on  the  part  of  the  party  licensed,  to  be  forfeited,  for 
instance,  if  his  liquors  were  adulterated.  I  would  have  a  public  inspector  of 
liquors.  In  regard  to  the  country  my  idea  is,  that  if  there  is  any  town  or 
section  of  the  country,  where  they  have  arrived  at  a  sufficient  degree  of 
advancement  or  refinement  to  dispense  with  the  sale  of  liquor  entirely,  I 
would  let  that  town  or  section  of  the  country  decide  for  itself  the  question 
of  sale. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  when  the  license  laws  were  in  operation  in  the 
Commonwealth  ? 

A.    I  do. 

&  Do  you  remember  the  time  when  there  were  not  as  many  unlicensed 
places  of  sale  as  licensed  ? 

A.     I  think  not. 

Q.    Have  you  a  distinct  knowledge  or  recollection  upon  that  subject  ? 

A.  I  have  only  a  general  recollection.  I  think  that  licensing  tends  to 
restrain  the  unlicensed  places.  That  is  my  judgment  from  observation. 

Q.     You  spoke  of  a  heavy  charge  for  licensing  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  the  sum  you  have  named  as  sufficient  to  restrain  or 
restrict  the  business  of  large  dealers  ? 

A.  Perhaps  the  license  should  be  proportionate  to  the  magnitude  of  the 
sales. 

Q.  Would  not  the  question  you  have  raised,  as  to  whether  a  party  was  in 
a  proper  condition  to  be  a  purchaser,  be  far  more  difficult  to  resolve  than  the 
question  involved  in  the  present  form  of  the  law  ? 

A.     I  think  not. 

Q.  Would  you  not  be  compelled  to  let  a  party  go  on  until  he  had  become 
inebriated,  before  you  could  punish  the  seller  ? 

A.  I  think  not ;  I  think  it  would  be  much  more  easy  to  procure  a  con- 
viction than  it  is  at  present. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  the  right  of  towns  to  suppress  it  according  to  their 
pleasure.  That  is  clearly  shifting  the  principle  of  the  enactment  of  criminal 
laws,  and  changes  the  theory  of  our  Commonwealth  ? 

A .     Then  I  would  change  it. 

Q.  I  ask  you  why  a  thousand  citizens  of  Boston,  who  have  children 
that  they  wish  to  rear  in  good  habits,  have  not  the  right  to  protest  against  the 
open  sale  of  liquor,  and  its  seductive  influences,  as  presented  under  the  old 
license  law  ? 

A.     I  think  a  license  law  would  give  the  best  protection. 

Q.     Then  why  not  enforce  it  upon  the  country  at  large  ? 


214  APPENDIX. 

A.  My  idea  is  to  leave  it  to  the  communities  to  decide  the  question  accord- 
ing to  their  best  judgment.  I  can  conceive  of  a  community  where  the  people 
would  vote  with  great  unanimity  to  have  no  sale.  "Where  they  were  so  unan- 
imous upon  the  subject,  I  would  let  them  do  as  they  pleased. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  in  a  large  city,  especially  in  one  having  a  grow- 
ing foreign  element,  that  the  principle  you  enunciate  here  would  be  exceed- 
ingly unfair  in  its  operation,  in  making  the  whole  American  population  subject 
to  the  vote  of  the  foreign  element,  m  so  great  a  matter  as  the  use  of  liquor  and 
its  consequences  ? 

A.  My  idea  upon  that  subject  is  that  in  the  large  towns  and  in  large 
cities,  you  would  always  be  obliged  to  have  a  license  law ;  for  in  large  towns 
we  cannot  attain  that  degree  of  perfection  that  is  possible  in  some  of  the 
quiet  valleys  of  the  interior. 

Q.  Does  not  the  very  implication  of  your  answer,  that  we  have  not  arrived 
at  that  degree  of  perfection,  tend  to  introduce  machinery  that  would  debar 
our  journeying  that  way  ? 

A.     No,  sir  ;  but  I  think  the  present  law  does. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  it  would  be  exceedingly  unfair,  in  the  case  of  two 
adjoining  towns,  where  one  wished  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor  and  the  other 
did  not,  for  those  who  desired  to  suppress  the  sale  ?  Would  not  the  one  be 
subject  to  the  action  of  the  other  ? 

A.  To  a  very  limited  extent.  Parties  would  not  travel  from  one  city  to 
another  to  get  a  glass  of  liquor. 

Q.  Through  what  difficulties  would  not  the  lover  of  liquor  go  to  get  his 
dram  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  it  would  have  a  very  pernicious  effect. 

Q.     Charlestown  and  Boston  are  adjacent  to  each  other 

A.  I  apprehend  that  in  Charlestown,  Boston,  Roxbury,  and  in  those  large 
cities,  the  license  law  is  the  best  remedy  against  intemperance  and  vice. 

Q.  Are  you  sure  that  there  has  been  an  increase  of  drunkenness  in  Boston 
during  the  last  twenty  years,  considering  the  increase  in  population  ? 

A.    It  is  much  greater  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  inhabitants. 

Q.     I  think  it  is  difficult  to  show  that. 

A.     I  take  it  from  the  police  record. 

TESTIMONY  OF  JOHN  C.  CLUER. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     What  is  your  prese-nt  position  ? 

A .     I  am  a  police  officer,  at  present. 

Q.     What  are  your  peculiar  duties  in  relation  to  the  police  ? 

A.  My  peculiar  duties  are  to  look  after  cases  of  intemperance.  Every 
morning  I  report  first  at  the  office  and  then  go  into  the  Tombs.  I  take  the 
name  of  every  prisoner,  the  number  of  the  cell  in  which  he  is  confined,  his  age, 
the  charge  against  him,  the  name  of  the  officer  who  arrested  him,  and  the 
station  with  which  the  officer  is  connected.  I  then  go  to  the  cells  and  speak 
to  the  party  confined,  and  ask  him  generally  these  questions :  WTiere  do  you 
live?  What  is  your  trade ?  Are  you  married ?  How  many  children  have 
you  ?  How  did  you  happen  to  get  here  ?  Of  course,  a  very  large  propor- 
tion of  the  parties  who  aro  confined,  arc  confined  for  being  drunk.  I  have 


APPENDIX.  215 

here  a  report  of  the  cases  of  intemperance  occuring  -within  seven  days,  which 
I  made  out  some  three  weeks  ago,  when  I  was  about  delivering  a  lecture  on 
intemperance.  [Produces  report.]  Here  are  the  answers  to  the  questions 
that  I  ask,  for  I  write  all  the  time  that  I  am  asking. 

Q.     How  recent  were  those  seven  days  ? 

A'  From  January  20th  to  the  28th,  taking  the  Sundays  out.  After  I  have 
asked  them  all  these  questions  and  learned  all  that  I  can  from  the  prisoners, 
I  then  go  up  stairs  and  sit  down,  and  I  keep  the  record  of  every  case  that 
comes  up.  There  are  many  cases  that  I  think  that  it  is  best  to  take  bail  for, 
and  put  them  on  probation.  I  ask  the  judges  to  lessen  their  fines  and  give 
them  moral  advice.  I  keep  a  record  in  my  book  of  all  the  parties  I  become 
bail  for.  After  all  the  prisoners  have  been  tried  in  the  morning,  their  friends 
come  into  my  office  in  the  Tombs,  and  I  make  such  arrangements  for  the  wel- 
fare of  the  prisoners  as  I  have  power  to  do.  I  attend  court  again  in  the  after- 
noon. At  night  I  visit  such  of  the  homes  of  the  prisoners  as  I  have  selected 
and  made  a  note  of  during  the  day,  to  see  their  families.  I  talk  with  the  men 
and  women.  I  advise  them  to  leave  off  the  drinking  of  intoxicating  liquors, 
and  urge  them  to  sign  the  pledge.  I  seldom  go  home  before  eleven  o'clock  at 
night,  frequently  not  until  twelve  o'clock.  That  is  my  usual  round  of  duty. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  Is  this  duty  imposed  upon  you  as  a  police 
officer  ? 

A.  It  is  a  part  of  my  special  duty.  I  was  appointed  under  the  administra- 
tion of  Mayor  Lincoln,  and  since  Col.  Kurtz  has  been  Chief.  In  consequence 
of  statements  made  by  Mr.  Miner  and  Mr.  Spooner,  I  received  instructions  to 
ask  of  prisoners  who  were  put  in  for  drunkenness,  whether  they  would 
tell  where  they  got  their  liquor.  Every  morning  I  ask  that  question. 
I  have  here  [producing  paper]  a  list  of  the  prisoners  of  whom  I  have  asked 
that  question — a  list  containing  some  thousands  of  names.  I  have  frequently 
been  insulted  on  my  asking  that  question.  The  prisoners  feel  that  they  are 
outraged  when  asked  to  tell  where  they  purchased  their  liquor.  With  two 
exceptions,  all  that  I  have  inquired  of  refused  to  tell  where  they  got  their 
liquor.  One  purchased  his  rum  at  what  is  called  the  "  Horse  Shoe,"  where, 
for  five  cents,  they  take  a  glass  and  go  and  brew  their  own  rum — an 
article,  as  has  been  said,  that  "  kills  around  a  corner."  That  man  was  so 
stupid,  that,  by  the  time  I  got  him  up  stairs,  I  could  not  get  the  statement  out 
of  him.  The  other  one  backed  out  from  telling  before  I  could  get  him  into 
the  dock. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  What  do  you  find  to  be  the  condition  of  the 
families  that  you  have  visited,  as  regards  intemperance  ? 

A.  I  will  state  a  fact  that  will  answer  that  question.  At  night,  as  people 
are  going  out  of  some  place  of  amusement,  I  frequently  make  it  my  duty  to 
follow  some  ragged  children  home.  I  select  three  or  four,  who  appear  to  be 
in  company,  and  follow  them  to  their  homes,  and  I  generally  find  that  both 
parents  and  children  are  drunkards. 

Q.     How  extensive  is  the  drunkenness  of  the  children  ? 

A.  Very  extensive.  One  day,  after  making  my  tour  among  the  prisoners 
who  had  been  arrested  for  drunkenness,  police  officer  Perry  called  my  atten- 
tion to  some  little  girls  that  he  said  were  starving,  and  whose  parents  were 


216  APPENDIX. 

drunkards.  I  visited  their  home.  Their  statement  was,  -that  two  of  them 
had  slept  in  an  alley-way,  and  the  other  under  a  sink.  On  entering  a  room, 
I  found  their  father  sitting  stupid  drunk,  a  bottle,  that  had  contained  liquor, 
broken  and  lying  on  the  floor,  and  another  containing  New  England  rum. 
There  was  another  man  lying  in  the  corner,  so  drunk  that  I  was  unable  to 
remove  him.  I  then  went  with  two  other  little  girls  into  a  room  in  Adams 
Street,  and  found  both  the  father  and  mother  of  one  of  them  stupid  drunk, 
and  the  mother  of  the  other  little  girl  stupid  drunk.  In  obedience  to  the 
instructions  given  me  by  the  Chief  of  Police,  I  complained  in  the  Police 
Court  of  the  man  who  kept  the  rum-shop  just  at  the  entrance  of  the  place 
where  these  cases  were  found,  but  I  was  never  even  summoned  as  a  witness 
in  the  case.  How  it  was  settled,  I  never  knew.  I  made  a  complaint,  a 
warrant  was  granted,  and  the  man  came  into  court. 

Q.     How  old  were  those  girls  ? 

A.     The  eldest,  I  think,  was  thirteen,  and  the  youngest  twelve. 

Q.  State  what  you  know,  from  your  own  observation,  as  to  the  secret  sale 
and  use  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  know  a  house  of  ten  rooms  in  this  city,  and  every  room  is  a  rum- 
shop.  I  know  another  tenement,  where,  in  a  room  of  twelve  feet  square, 
thirteen  people  live,  and  they  are  all  drunkards,  and  keep  rum  in  the  place. 
I  know  of  another  place  where  there  are  fourteen  persons  in  a  room  of  the 
same  size ;  a  part  are  drunkards,  and  a  part  are  not.  I  know  of  two  blocks 
in  this  city  where  there  arc  sixty-four  families,  and  where,  I  do  not  believe, 
any  person  here  could  live  and  not  become  a  drunkard.  Such  is  the  physical 
condition  of  the  place,  that  I  conceive  it  to  be  utterly  impossible  for  any 
human  being  to  breathe  the  pestiferous  air  and  be  a  sober,  decent  man.  And 
that  block  is  owned  by  a  member  of  Congress  from  Massachusetts. 

Q.  Have  you  noticed  as  to  the  manner  in  which  liquor  is  conveyed  into 
those  houses  ? 

A .  Stills,  sir,  are  as  common  in  Boston  as  tea-kettles  are  getting  to  be  in 
a  certain  class.  Any  one  that  has  ever  studied  the  subject,  knows  that  an  old 
kettle,  with  a  piece  of  broken  gas-pipe,  makes  a  capital  still,  and  will  make 
as  much  rum  in  six  hours  as  will  make  a  whole  neighborhood  drunk. 

Q.  When  those  places  are  closed,  I  want  to  inquire  what  devices  are 
resorted  to  by  the  people  to  obtain  liquor  and  to  get  it  into  their  houses  ? 

A .  Some  of  them  make  it.  Some  get  it  by  various  devices.  Some  of  them, 
like  a  great  many  temperance  people,  are  troubled  with  fits  of  sickness  and  get 
it  from  the  agents,  but  generally  they  get  it  from  other  liquor-dealers.  They 
are  all  clubbed  together. 

Q.  During  what  period  of  the  twenty-four  hours  is  liquor  carried  into  the 
houses  ? 

A.     During  the  night,  generally. 

Q.  Is  it  generally  understood  among  those  people  that  when  the  liquor  is 
got  into  the  dwelling-houses  that  it  is  not  subject  to  seizure  ? 

A.     They  understand  that  perfectly  well.     In  a  case  that  I  recently  prose- 
cuted, the  owner  of  the  place  had  a  large  quantity  stowed  away  in  his  house, 
and  knew  very  well  that  it  could  not  be  touched. 
i    Q.    How  extensively  is  that  device  now  resorted  to  ? 


APPENDIX.  217 

A.  My  impression  is,  that  it  is  very  extensively  indeed.  There  is  hardly 
a  street  in  Boston  where  the  poorer  classes  live,  that  I  do  not  visit  every  week, 
and  frequently  a  great  many  times  in  a  week.  I  average  five  visits  every 
night,  to  places  of  this  kind. 

Q.  Has  that  device  of  carrying  liquor  at  night  into  the  dwelling-houses, 
increased  since  there  has  been  more  shutting  up  of  the  shops  ? 

A.  There  was  very  little  of  it  previous  to  the  closing  of  the  shops.  It  has 
grown  up  since  then,  entirely,  so  far  as  my  knowledge  of  the  matter  goes  ? 

Q.  You  had  the  same  means  of  knowing  previous  to  the  closing  of  the 
shops  that  you  have  now  ? 

A.  Certainly,  I  had.  Before  I  became  an  officer  at  all,  it  was  my  prac- 
tice to  learn  all  that  I  could  upon  this  subject. 

Q.  Do  you  know  as  a  matter  of  fact  that  this  way  of  carrying  liquor  into 
the  dwelling-houses,  did  not  exist  until  since  they  began  to  shut  up  the  shops  ? 

A .  I  cannot  now  recall,  within  the  seven  years  previous,  half  a  dozen 
cases. 

Q.     Are  they  now  very  numerous  ? 

Q.  Very  common,  indeed.  Gentlemen, — temperance  men, — have  gone 
with  me  between  eleven  and  twelve  o'clock  at  night,  to  see  this  state  of  facts. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  a  tetotaller  ? 

A.  I  have  not  taken  a  glass  of  any  kind  of  intoxicating  liquor  for  thirty- 
three  years.  I  have  never  taken  liquor  but  twice  during  that  time.  Once  I 
took  two  teaspoonsful  of  brandy,  and  another  time  half  a  glass  of  whiskey,  and 
and  I  was  so  disgusted  with  the  thing  that  I  fired  the  bottle  out  of  the 
window. 

Q.  You  have  been  actively  engaged,  I  suppose,  in  the  temperance 
cause  ? 

A.  I  have  taken  such  steps  as  I  thought  would  promote  the  cause  of  tem- 
perance, ever  since  I  signed  the  pledge. 

Q.  I  will  ask  you  what  change,  if  any,  of  the  present  law,  you  deem  advis- 
able ?  Do  you  think  it  possible,  as  things  are,  to  execute  the  present  law  ? 
Can  you  shut  up  the  shops  ?  and  can  you  thereby  check  and  prevent 
drunkenness  ? 

A.  It  is  only  a  matter  of  justice  to  myself,  that  I  be  allowed  to  say  in 
answer  to  one  other  question  that  ought  to  be  put  to  me,  that  I  have 
always,  until  four  years  ago,  been  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory  liquor  law,  and 
never  in  favor  of  a  license  law.  I  have  never  been  in  favor  of  the  present 
law  for  the  reasons  I  stated  a  few  minutes  ago.  From  observing  such  facts  as 
come  under  my  notice ;  from  witnessing  such  misery,  constantly  and  hourly 
increasing,  notwithstanding  my  feelings  are  all  in  that  direction,  my  judgment 
says  that  it  would  be  better  to  alter  the  present  law. 

Q.  As  far  as  you  have  had  opportunity  for  observation,  do  you  think  that 
if  the  action  of  the  authorities  should  be  pursued  ten  times  as  rigorously  as 
now,  it  would  check  the  consumption  of  liquor  by  these  people  ? 

A.     I  think  it  would  not,  for  this  reason  :     They  conceive  the  law  to  be  a 
persecution ;   their  judgment  has  not  yet  been  convinced ;   they  think  they 
have  a  right  to  drink,  and  that  any  attempt  to  prevent  their  drinking,  is  med- 
dling with  their  rights. 
28 


218  APPENDIX. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     How  long  have  you  been  in  the  city  ? 

A .     Over  twenty  years. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  employed  in  the  city  government  ? 

A-     Two  years,  last  June. 

Q.  You  were  in  the  habit  of  preaching  temperance  a  good  deal,  I  believe, 
before  you  got  into  the  city  employ  ? 

A .     I  never  preached  temperance  ;  I  lectured  on  it,  and  practised  it. 

Q.     You  lectured  on  temperance  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  use  any  violent  words  against  the  city  government  before 
you  were  in  its  employ  ? 

A.  Repeatedly,  but  not  against  this  city  government.  We  have  had  a 
reform  worthy  the  excellent  man  that  has  been  at  the  head  of  it  for  the  last 
few  years.  Things  are  now  in  a  different  condition  from  what  they  were 
when  I  exposed  them. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  AVERY.)  You  spoke  of  the  children  in  certain  localities 
being  in  the  habit  of  using  intoxicating  liquors  and  becoming  drunk.  Do  your 
observations  lead  you  to  the  conclusion  that  this  intemperance  among  children 
is  the  result  of  the  secret  use  of  liquor  in  families,  induced  by  the  attempt  to 
suppress  the  open  sale  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is.  I  would  add  that,  in  my  opinion,  family  drinking  is  one 
great  cause  of  intemperance.  I  should  like  to  say  something  about  wine. 
All  our  churches  use  intoxicating  wine.  Last  night  I  analyzed  some  of  the 
"  wine  "  used  in  the  Orthodox  churches,  and  I  found  but  14  per  cent,  of  wine 
in  it. 

(Mr.  MINER.)  Mr.  Cluer  is  now  testifying  of  something  that  he  knows 
very  little  about. 

(Mr.  CLUER.)  Here  is  the  wine — (producing  a  bottle  of  wine.)  I  do  not 
say  that  such  wine  is  used  in  all  the  Univcrsalist  churches ;  but  I  would  like  to 
test  some  of  the  wine  used  in  your  church. 

TESTIMONY  OF  THEODORE  VOELCKERS. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.     In  Boston. 

Q.     What  is  your  business  ? 

A.     I  am  an  architect. 

Q.  Have  you  given  your  attention  to  the  subject  of  intemperance,  and  to 
the  condition  of  the  poorer  classes  in  relation  to  intemperance  ? 

A.  I  have,  sir.  Unfortunately,  I  have,  myself,  had  a  very  large  experi- 
ence in  drinking,  but,  thanks  to  God,  since  four  years  ago,  I  have  been  a  sober 
man,  and  since  then  I  have  made  it  a  study  how  to  benefit  my  fellow-men. 

Q.  Will  you  state  what  you  have  observed  of  the  extent  of  the  misery  in 
Boston  caused  by  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.  It  is  a  fact  too  well  known  to  need  any  elucidation  on  my  part. 
Drinking  is  so  extensive,  and  has  been,  since  I  have  been  a  resident  of  Bos- 
ton, (twenty  years,)  that  I  have  often  wondered  where  it  would  end. 


APPENDIX.  219 

Q.  Will  you  state  what  you  know  in  regard  to  the  intemperate  habits  of 
the  poorer  classes ; — how  they  get  their  liquor,  and  how  they  are  affected 
by  it? 

A .  I  know  nothing  of  their  ways  of  obtaining  liquor,  but  I  know  how  I 
used  to  obtain  it.  On  one  occasion,  when  I  was  refused  liquor  in  a  bar-room, 
I  obtained  it  at  the  State  Agency,  and  I  got  drunk  on  that  liquor.  I  know 
that  others  do  the  same  thing  now,  out  in  the  country  towns. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion,  based  upon  your  own  observation  and  experience, 
of  the  value  of  the  prohibitory  liquor  law  ? 

A.  I  attempted,  some  days  ago,  when  the  Committee  had  a  hearing,  to 
reply  to  a  question  addressed  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  Clark  : — "  Do  you  know  of  any 
one  of  the  seventy  thousand  active  temperance  men  of  Massachusetts  who 
desires  a  license  law  ?  " — that  he  might  refer  to  me  as  a  reformed  drunkard, 
and  as  one  who  desired  a  license  law.  I  have  desired  a  license  law  ever  since 
the  appetite  for  drink  was  fastened  upon  me.  My  mind  has  been  much  engaged 
upon  the  subject,  and  I  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  since  we  cannot 
prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor,  we  must  control  it  for  the  benefit  of  humanity. 

Q.  If  I  understand  you,  then,  you  believe  that  a  license  law,  if  properly 
framed  and  executed,  would  better  promote  the  cause  of  temperance  than  a 
prohibitory  law  ? 

A.     I  do. 

Q.  You  speak  from  your  own  experience  and  observation  upon  this 
subject  ? 

A.    I  do. 

TESTIMONY  OF  THOMAS  GAFFIELD. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  How  long  have  you  been  connected  with  the 
city  government  ? 

A.     For  nearly  four  years. 

Q.     In  what  capacity  ? 

A.  For  one  year  as  Councilman,  and  am  now  entering  on  my  third  year  as 
Alderman. 

Q.     Have  you  had  any  connection  with  the  Committee  on  the  Police  ? 

A.  Last  year  I  was  a  member  of  that  committee  ;  this  year  I  am  chair- 
man. 

Q.     Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 

A.     In  Merchants'  Row. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  there  ? 

A.     Since  1840,  with  the  exception  of  one  year. 

Q.  Looking  at  the  whole  subject,  the  whole  field,  from  your  point  of  view, 
both  as  a  citizen  in  business  and  as  a  member  of  the  city  government  for  the 
last  few  years,  will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  to  this  Legislative  Committee, 
your  opinion  of  the  value  of  the  prohibitory  liquor  law,  now  on  our  statute 
books,  for  the  purpose  of  suppressing  drunkenness,  as  compared  with  some 
system  of  regulation  ? 

A.  I  am  a  temperance"  man  in  practice,  but  I  never  spoke  upon  the  subject 
of  temperance  until- this  moment.  I  was  never  present  at  the  meeting  of  a 
temperance  society  as  a  member.  As  a  temperance  man,  I  was  in  favor  of 


220  APPENDIX. 

the  prohibitory  liquor  law  as  an  experiment  for  the  suppression  of  intemper- 
ance, which  I  look  upon  as  one  of  the  greatest  eTils  of  society,  and  as  pro- 
ducing ninety-nine  hundredths  of  all  the  misery  and  crime  in  the  community. 
I  thought  that  a  prohibitory  law  was  a  good  experiment  when  enacted,  but  I 
think  that  since  that  enactment — in  1854 — drunkenness  has  increased.  There 
are  three  or  four  liquor  shops  in  Merchants'  Row,  and  I  have  noticed,  on 
Saturday  afternoons,  the  large  number  of  demijohns  that  go  into  those  stores 
where  liquors  are  sold,  to  be  filled  and  carried  out  of  ^  town  for  the  comfort  of 
the  people  of  the  neighboring  towns  during  Sunday  and  the  following  week- 
I  have  thought,  and  think  now,  that  there  is  now  more  drunkenness  in  Boston 
than  there  was  previous  to  the  passage  of  that  law  ;  and  my  conviction  as  a 
temperance  man  is,  that  as  the  next  experiment,  a  license  law  had  better  be 
tried.  I  am  in  favor  of  total  abstinence,  although  I  would  let  any  man  use 
liquor  when  ordered  by  his  physician.  I  would  take  a  glass  of  brandy  and 
water,  or  of  whiskey  and  sugar,  if  ordered  to  do  so  by  my  physician,  as  a 
medicine ;  or  J  would  take  it  from  day  to  day,  if  run  down  in  health  or 
strength,  if  ordered  so  to  do  by  a  physician.  If  that  makes  me  not  a  total 
abstinence  man,  then  I  am  not  one. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  do  not  object  to  the  prohibitory  law  upon 
principle,  but  you  object  only  because  you  think  that  experiment  has  not 
succeeded  ? 

A.     That  is  my  ground. 

Q.  From  your  knowledge  of  the  action  of  the  city  government,  and  of  the 
spirit  that  has  ruled  in  the  administration  of  criminal  law  in  Boston  in  the 
several  departments  of  responsibility,  are  you,  as  a  citizen  of  Boston,  of  the 
opinion  that  the  experiment  of  a  prohibitory  liquor  law  has  been  fairly  tried  ? 

A.  I  should  not  wish  to  say  anything  about  previous  years  or  decades  of 
years ;  but,  from  my  own  experience  in  the  city  government,  I  will  say  that 
the  principle  of  temperance  is  now  the  ruling  principle  in  the  city  govern- 
ment. I  do  not  believe  that  any  twelve  men  in  Boston,  taken  though  they 
may  be  from  any  circle,  act  more  strictly  in  accordance  with  the  principles  of 
temperance  than  does  the  present  Board  of  Aldermen.  I  make  this  remark 
because  I  am  aware  that  an  opinion  exists  among  the  members  of  the  Legisla- 
ture and  the  people  of  the  State  generally,  that  the  Board  of  Aldermen  is  a 
set  of  drinking  men.  I  entered  the  Board  of  Aldermen  three  years  ago. 
There  is  one  committee  of  the  Board  that  has  arduous  duties  to  perform  ;  are 
frequently  detained  long  at  their  work,  and  occasionally  take  refreshments, 
but  no  intoxicating  drinks.  I  know  that  that  committee,  of  which  I  have  now 
the  honor  to  be  chairman,  take  nothing  in  the  way  of  intoxicating  liquors. 
There  are  no  drinks  upon  their  refreshment  table,  but  water  and  tea  and 
coffee,  and  yet  they  work  as  hard  as  any  committee  in  the  city  government. 
The  4th  of  July  is  thought  to  be  an  occasion  when,  if  ever,  liquor  is  to  be 
used.  On  the  last  4th  of  July,  I  was  chairman  of  the  committee  of  arrange- 
ments, and  was  told  that  it  would  be  impossible  to  prohibit  the  use  of  strong 
drink  on  that  occasion.  I  told  the  committee  that  I  would  not  approve  a  bill 
that  had  liquor  in  it,  and  if  I  heard  that  any  liquor  was  bought,  I  would 
deduct  the  amount  from  any  bill  before  it  should  be  paid.  I  had  the  testimony 
of  all,  that  the  rule  was  observed,  and  that  nothing  was  drank  down  in  the 


APPENDIX.  221 

harbor  stronger  than  coffee,  and  all  said  that  it  was  the  best  time  -that  they 
had  ever  enjoyed.  An  Order  was  passed  two  or  three  years  since  prohibiting 
the  use  of  liquor  at  all  of  our  meetings.  There  were  a  few  negative  votes 
in  the  Common  Council,  but  the  Order  was  passed  unanimously  in  the 
Board  of  Aldermen,  and,  as  a  rule,  lived  up  to  religiously  during  the  year. 

Q.     Was  the  experience  of  last  year,  in  that  respect,  a  new  era  ? 

A.  It  was  the  continuation  of  an  era  previously  commenced.  I  saw  it 
reported  here  yesterday  by  an  ex-mayor,  that  liquor  was  formerly  permitted 
by  the  city  government  to  be  used  by  committees  in  the  form  of  refreshment, 
but  it  is  not  so  now,  and  so  long  as  I  am  member,  or  chairman  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  Accounts,  it  shall  not  be  used  in  that  way. 

Q.    You  are  a  prohibitionist,  then  ? 

A.     I  am,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  aware,  that  in  previous  years,  similar  orders  were  passed  but 
were  not  regarded  by  the  administration  as  in  practical  force  ? 

A.     Ir.  the  Know  Nothing  administration. 

Q.     How  extensive  was  that  administration  as  to  time  ? 

A.  It  lasted  for  some  time.  I  think  that  the  city  government  in  this 
respect  has  been  improving  for  the  last  three  or  four  years.  I  can  only  speak 
from  my  own  observation  and  experience,  but  I  think  that  there  is  now  a 
temperance  feeling  in  the  whole  city  government. 

Q.  Up  to  the  last  year,  have  not  items  for  liquor  in  bills  for  refreshment, 
been  paid,  notwithstanding  whatever  orders  may  have  been  passed  upon  the 
subject? 

A.     They  may  have  been  on  a  few  occasions. 

Q.  Is  it  true  that  the  school  committee,  some  few  years  since,  went  down 
the  harbor  and  used  refreshments  extensively  ? 

A.     Not  that  I  am  aware  of. 

Q.     Have  you  been  a  member  of  the  school  board  at  any  time  ? 

A.  I  was  of  the  primary  school  board,  until  its  reorganization,  but  have 
not  been  a  member  of  the  school  committee  since  1854.  I  am  chairman  of 
the  committee  upon  public  instruction,  upon  the  part  of  the  city  council.  At 
any  entertainment  of  the  Board  of  Aldermen,  it  would  now  be  considered  a 
breach  of  decorum  and  good  manners  for  any  gentleman  to  bring  liquor  into 
the  room,  even  though  he  paid  for  it  himself. 

Q.     That  is  the  present  condition  of  the  Board  of  Aldermen  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  the  Board  of  Aldermen  of  this  year,  of  whom  you  say  this,  and 
the  Board  of  Aldermen  of  last  year,  who  sanctioned  the  course  you  have 
described,  continued  to  select  known  liquor-sellers  in  making  the  list  of  names 
from  which  traverse  juries  should  be  drawn  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  the  name  of  any  man  was  ever  put  upon  the  list  because 
he  was  a  liquor-seller. 

Q.  I  asked  if  they  continued  to  select  the  names  of  known  liquor-sellers. 
I  ask  a  question  of  fact. 

A.    Not  that  I  know  of. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  or  not  any  such  names  selected  within  two 
years,  are  now  in  the  jury  list  ? 


222  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  ain  not  aware  that  there  are.  The  jury  list  is  made  up  in  this  way. 
No  man  can  be  a  juror  who  is  not  a  voter,  therefore  the  city  clerk  gives  each 
alderman  the  voting  list  of  his  ward.  One  alderman  and  four  councilmen 
make  up  the  jury  list.  They  meet  together  and  pick  out  one  hundred  names 
from  each  ward  and  these  are  put  into  the  jury-box.  When  a  service  is  made 
upon  the  mayor  for  twelve  jurors  he  nominates  two  aldermen  to  select  the 
names  of  twelve  jurors  from  this  list.  They  put  their  hands  into  the  box  and 
pull  out  the  first  name.  It  is  impossible  for  them  to  know  who  is  coming  out. 

Q.     l>ut  no  names  would  come  out  of  the  box  that  were  not  put  in  ? 

A.     Certainly  not. 

Q.     It  is  possible  to  know  what  names  are  put  in  ? 

A .  I  do  not  now  recollect  of  the  name  of  a  single  liquor-dealer  being 
drawn  out  since  I  have  been  an  alderman.  I  do  not  know  as  I  should  put 
tn  the  name  of  a  man  that  I  knew  sold  liquor. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  the  time  has  ever  been,  since  the  existence  of  the 
present  law,  that  the  members  of  the  Board  of  Aldermen  have  not  selected  a 
large  majority  of  the  jurymen  from  men  who  were  known  to  be  engaged  in 
the  liquor  traffic  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  as  to  that.  I  only  speak  from  my  own  knowledge,  and 
of  my  own  ward. 

Q.     You  would  not  think  it  proper  to  select  a  liquor-dealer  ? 

A.  I  never  did  place  a  liquor-dealer  on  the  jury-list;  but  if  Mr.  Wil- 
liams or  Mr.  Young,  or  Mr.  A  or  B  or  C,  who  are  engaged  in  the  liquor 
business,  but  who  are  excellent  men,  should  express  a  wish  to  be  on  a  jury, 
and  put  it  upon  the  ground  that,  as  citizens  and  tax-payers,  they  had  a  right 
to  serve  as  jurors,  I  might  put  their  names  in. 

Q.  Would  you  deem  it  improper,  under  a  state  of  things  in  which  you 
knew  the  city  government  were  about  to  attempt  to  execute  the  law  against 
liquor-dealers,  to  run  a  hazard  in  the  selection  of  names  that  might  be  drawn 
as  the  traverse  jury,  by  putting  the  names  of  liquor-dealers  in  the  traverse 
jury  list  ? 

A.  I  might  take  the  names  ;  I  might  take  the  hazard.  I  was  once  on  a 
jury  when  there  were  several  cases  against  liquor-sellers  brought  up,  and  we 
found  bills  against  the  parties  in  almost  all  the  cases.  I  took  particular 
notice  of  one  man  on  the  jury  who  was  a  liquor-seller,  and  I  noticed  that  his 
hand  went  up  with  the  rest.  I  supposed,  then,  that  his  hand  went  up  because 
it  would  be  thought,  if  he  did  not  thus  vote,  it  was  because  he  was  himself  a 
liquor-seller.  I  had  rather  trust  an  honest  liquor-seller  than  a  too  ultra-tem- 
perance man.  I  would  trust  a  fairj  honest  man,  no  matter  what  his  business 
might  be. 

'Q.  Would  you  deem  it  a  healthy  state  of  things  when  a  man  was  put  on 
the  jury  who  was  so  related  or  connected  with  the  party  to  be  tried  that 
he  would  feel  an  interest  in  keeping  his  brother  from  conviction,  because 
the  next  turn  of  the  wheel  might  bring  him  in  ? 

A.  I  might  hesitate  under  such  circumstances,  on  the  ground  that  the 
man  was  an  interested  party. 


APPENDIX.  223 

Q.  You  spoke  of  the  present  tone  of  thought  and  feeling  in  the  Board  of 
Aldermen ;  do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  present  Board  are  unanimously  of 
that  feeling,  or  that  only  a  majority  of  them  are  ? 

A.  The  order  that  I  referred  to  was  passed  unanimously,  but  I  know  that 
they  are  not  all  total  abstinence  men.  For  that  reason  I  respect  them  all  the 
more ;  they  make  temperance  the  rule  at  their  entertainments,  and  do 
not  mean  to  spend  any  of  the  city  money  for  liquor. 

Q.  You  have  not  yet  answered  the  question,  whether  you  think  that  the 
experiment  of  a  prohibitory  liquor  law  has  been  fairly  tried  in  Boston  ? 

A.  If  you  should  ask  me  whether  I  thought  the  city  government  had  tried 
to  carry  out  the  prohibitory  liquor  law,  .1  should  say,  "  No,  sir  " ;  for  we  have 
not. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MORSE.)     Why  not  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  I  may  say,  because  we  found  that  when  we  tried  to 
carry  out  the  law,  liquor  would  still  be  used.  The  great  object  of  the  law 
should  be  to  suppress  intemperance ;  but  we  found,  that  if  we  shut  up  a 
liquor-shop  in  one  street,  one  immediately  opened  on  another,  and,  therefore, 
we  had  not  accomplished  the  object  of  the  law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  For  one  reason  and  another,  then,  the  authorities 
have  not  tried  to  execute  the  law  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  they  have  tried  to  shut  up  all  the  liquor-shops,  for 
they  have  not  thought  that  public  sentiment  would  warrant  them  in  doing  it. 
When  the  election  was  pending,  I  was  asked  the  question,  whether  I  was  in 
favor  of  a  license  law.  I  replied,  that  I  was  in  favor  of  a  judicious  license  law. 
Another  question  asked  me  was,  whether  I  was  in  fa\sor  of  carrying  out  the 
present  status  of  the  city  government  in  relation  to  the  matter  of  intemper- 
ance. My  answer  was,  that  the  question  in  relation  to  entirely  suppressing 
the  sale  of  liquor  had  not  yet  come  up. 

Q.  For  one  cause  or  another,  then,  the  authorities  have  not  attempted  to 
suppress  the  liquor  traffic  in  Boston  ? 

A .  The  same  effort  has  not  been  made  that  would  have  been  made  had 
there  been  no  State  Constabulary,  whose  chief  work  it  is  to  carry  out  the 
present  law.  It  was  considered  as  being  their  work,  so  much  so,  that  the 
subject  of  suppressing  the  use  of  liquor  has  never  been  brought  before  the 
Police  Committee ;  but  the  suppression  of  nuisances  had  been  attempted 
whenever  brought  to  their. notice.  I  have  been  on  the  jury  when  there  were 
forty  or  fifty  nuisance  cases  acted  on. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  the  existence  of  the  Constabulary  as  relieving  the 
city  government  from  attempting  to  enforce  the  law  upon  this  subject  ? 

A.  They  are  acting  in  unison  to-day.  There  is  no  opposition  to  the  Con- 
stabulary on  the  part  of  the  police,  and  if  we  found  that  there  was,  we  should 
at  once  look  into  the  matter.  Any  man  on  the  police  force,  whom  we  find  to 
be  intemperate,  is  discharged.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  none  of  them  drink, 
for  probably  one-half  of  the  police  occasionaly  take  a  glass  of  liquor ;  but 
there  are  very  few  drunkards  among  them,  and  not  one  shall  remain  there 
when  the  fact  is  found  out.  As  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Police,  I 
pledge  myself  for  the  Mayor  and  for  the  city  government,  that  any  improper 
opposition  to  tiie  enforcement  of  any  law  upon  the  part  of  our  police  shall  be 


224  APPENDIX. 

punished,  and  any  charge  brought  against  any  member  of  the  police,  prop- 
erly substantiated,  shall  be  attended  to.  Of  course  we  cannot  attend  to 
charges  made  in  the  newspapers,  but  we  can  and  shall  attend  to  any  charges 
brought  before  us  in  a  proper  form  and  shape.  It  is  the  intention  of  the  city 
government  that  no  innocent  man  shall  suffer,  and  no  guilty  man  escape. 

Q.  You  said  that  the  city  government  had  not  made  those  efforts  to  sup- 
press the  sale  of  liquor  that  it  would  have  made  but  for  the  existence  of  the 
State  police  ? 

A.    I  do  not  say  that  they  have  made  no  effort. 

Q.  Has  the  city  government,  at  any  time,  put  forth  an  earnest  effort  to 
suppress  this  traffic  ? 

A.  We  have  never  given  orders  to  shut  up  all  the  places  of  sale.  There 
are  about  fifteen  hundred  of  them  in  Boston,  and  it  would  take  a  very  large 
force  to  close  them  all. 

Q.     I  want  to  know  whether  it  has  been  attempted  ? 

A.  We  know  that  liquor  must  be  sold.  We  want  to  suppress  intemper- 
ance and  to  promote  temperance.  We  want  liquor  sold  by  persons  who  will 
sell  it  properly,  and  not  sell  to  drunkards. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  How  is  it  that  you  feel  at  liberty  to  place  your 
convictions  as  to  the  expediency  or  non-expediency  of  the  law,  against  the 
duty  that  the  law  places  upon  you  as  an  officer  of  the  State  ? 

A.  We  have  to  take  facts  as  facts.  There  area  great  many  dead-letter 
laws  on  the  statute  books.  There  is  a  law  that  there  shall  be  no  smoking  in 
the  streets,  and  yet  one  man  in  every  ten  smokes.  There  is  another  law  that 
you  must  not  go  on  the  left-hand  side  in  the  street,  and  yet  many  are  found 
on  that  side.  This  is  another  of  the  laws  that  became  a  dead-letter,  after  the 
people  found  that  it  could  not  be  carried  out  by  proper  regulations. 

Q.     Was  the  law  ever  alive  in  Boston  ? 

A.    It  is  a  dead  letter  now. 

Q.     The  city  authorities  killed  it  at  the  very  beginning  ? 

A.  They  have  not  undertaken  to  carry  it  out  as  they  would  a  law  for  the 
suppression  of  any  serious  vice.  I  mean  they  have  not  tried  to  thoroughly 
suppress  the  sale  of  liquor,  but  they  have  tried  to  suppress  liquor  nuisances. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  know  that  there  are  a  great  many  seizures 
and  convictions  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  how  many  convictions  there  are.  I  know  that  when  I 
was  on  the  jury  we  found  frequent  convictions  for  violations  of  the  Nuisance 
Act,  but  not  against  common  sellers.  I  have  no  statistics  upon  that  point.  I 
know  that  if  all  afe  to  be  convicted  who  buy  liquor,  that  I  should  have  to  be 
convicted  for  buying  it  as  medicine. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Do  you  believe  it  possible,  by  a  prohibitory  law,  to 
check  the  sale  of  liquor  in  Boston  ? 

A.  I  do  not  believe  that  either  a  prohibitory  law  or  a  license  law  can  stop 
the  sale  of  liquor  in  Boston.  I  think  that  the  best  temperance  law  is  one's 
own  example.  I  think  that  the  law  of  love  will  accomplish  more  than  the 
law  of  compulsion. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  do  not  think  that  a  license  law  would 
restrain  the  sale  ? 


APPENDIX.  225 

A.  I  think  that  it  would  restrain  a  good  deal  of  it.  It  would  shut  up  all 
the  low  grog-shops,  and  confine  the  use  of  liquor  more  to  the  upper  classes. 
A  license  law  would  close  a  great  many  of  the  places  where  liquor  is  now 
sold,  but  would  not  stop  its  sale  entirely.  Any  law  can  be  evaded  by  those 
who  wish  to  drink.  I  know  that  under  the  existence  of  the  "  fifteen-gallon 
law  "  men  could  buy  twenty  gallons  and  one  gill  of  liquor,  drink  the  gill,  and 
sell  the  twenty  gallons  back  again. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  cases  where  the  law  was  enforced  against  these 
low  groggeries  which  were  not  licensed,  while  those  that  were  licensed  were 
not  disturbed  ? 

A.  I  was  young  then,  and  do  not  now  remember  about  the  operation  of 
the  law,  but  I  used  to  hear  of  different  ways  of  evading  it.  I  now  think  that 
the  next  experiment  should  be  with  a  judicious  license  law. 

Q.     When  was  that  fifteen-gallon  law  in  operation  ? 

A.    I  think  about  1837. 

Q.     How  long  did  it  exist  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  how  long. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  McCLELLAN.)  Have  yoli  any  knowledge  of  the  amount  of 
the  sale  of  liquor  that  is  carried  on  in  a  private  way  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know,  only  from  what  I  have  heard. 

Q.  Would  the  license  law  prevent  such  private  sales  from  being 
continued  ? 

A.    I  think  that  it  would  in  a  great  measure. 

Q.     Why? 

A.  Because,  suppose  that  there  were  three  hundred  licensed  dealers  where 
now  there  are  fifteen  hundred  dealers,  then  three  hundred  would  be  so  many 
special  police  officers  to  look  out  for  the  places  where  liquor  was  sold  by  the 


Q.    Would  you  have  open  bars  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  would  have  a  judicious  law,  with  stringent  regulations, 
and  an  inspection  of  liquor,  so  that  no  poison  should  be  sold,  but  the  details 
of  the  law  would  require  some  thought.  I  am  not  now  prepared  to  say  what 
they  should  be. 

Adjourned. 

29 


226  APPENDIX. 


EIGHTH    DAY. 

TUESDAY,  March  5th,  1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  nine  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  the  testimony  in  behalf  of 
the  petitioners  was  continued. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  CHARLES  F.  BARNARD. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Where  do  you  reside,  and  what  position  do  you 
occupy. 

A.  I  reside  in  West  Brookline,  and  labor  in  this  city  as  a  minister  at 
large. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  here  ? 

A.     Ever  since  1832. 

Q.     In  connection  with  what  institution  ? 

A .  Mainly  in  connection  with  an  institution  that  I  established,  the  War- 
ren Street  Chapel. 

Q.  Please  state  what  your  observation  has  been  as  to  the  progress  of  tem- 
perance, or  intemperance,  in  Boston,  in  the  last  twelve  or  fourteen  years. 

A.  I  think  I  have  known  something  about  it  for  fifty  years.  The  first  thing 
that  I  observed  in  life  was  the  habit  of  drinking,  which  was  then  very  common 
among  both  boys  and  men.  I  very  soon  saw  that  my  playmates  were 
sinking  under  this  terrible  evil,  and,  as  I  look  back,  I  think  that  before  I  was 
born  my  mother's  aversion  in  regard  to  this  thing,  fashioned  me  before  I  drew 
the  breath  of  life  to  be  opposed,  heart  and  soul,  to  the  intemperate  use  of 
wine,  or  any  alcoholic  drink.  I  very  soon  learned  that  the  poor  boys  that  I 
played  with,  and  who  fell,  fell  not  only  because  they  drank,  but  also  because 
they  did  other  things  which  were  abusive, — abusing  those  things  which  were 
put  into  our  hands  by  the  All  Wise  for  other  purposes.  My  whole  life  has 
been  a  study  against  sin  of  every  form,  and  I  have  studied  the  sin  of  intem- 
perance like  any  other  sin.  I  have  never  had  occasion  to  use  the  law  at  all. 
I  do  not  know  much  about  human  laws.  They  are  all  very  well,  perhaps,  in 
their  way,  but  we  are  under  a  higher  law.  John  the  Baptist  came  eating 
and  drinking,  and  the  old  law  on  stone  was  laid  aside.  "  Thou  shall,"  and 
"  Thou  shalt  not,"  were  lain  aside  when  the  Master  commenced  his  career, 
and  the  love  of  God,  in  the  soul  of  man,  and  certain  moral  principles  and 
ideas  and  thoughts  and  feelings,  are  the  higher  law,  infinitely  better  than  a 
prohibitory  law  or  a  license  law. 

Q.  What  is  your  observation  of  the  extent  of  the  use  of  intoxicating 
liquor,  since  this  prohibitory  law  took  effect  ? 

A.  I  have  never  known  so  much  drunkenness,  and  I  have  never  known  so 
much  bad  liquor  to  be  used.  Whether  this  increase  of  intemperance,  and 
the  use  of  the  horrible  stuff  called  liquor,  is  owing  to  the  prohibitory  law  or 
not,  I  do  not  know,  but  I  think  that  very  likely  it  is,  because  when  you  are 
very  severe,  you  open  the  door  for  a  great  deal  that  you  do  not  want  to  have. 


APPENDIX.  227 

When  we  were  boys  in  college,  and  were  told  that  we  could  not  go  to  the 
theatre,  we  would  go,  we  would  assert  our  independence.  But  when 
mother  found  it  out,  and  said  that  she  did  not  want  us  to  go,  then  we  stopped 
going,  not  out  of  any  regard  for  the  faculty,  but  out  of  that  inward  law — out 
of  that  inward  respect  for  mother,  which  was  better  than  any  prohibition. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  the  fact,  if  you  know  it,  as  to  the 
increase  of  secret  places  for  the  sale  of  liquor  among  the  poor  of  the  city  ? 

A.  I  do  not  go  to  those  places  and  know  nothing  about  them ;  only  I  know 
that  there  is  more  drunkenness  than  there  was  before,  and  more  bad  liquor 
used  ;  but  I  cannot  tell  where  it  comes  from. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  as  to  the  effect  of  a  prohibitory  liquor  law  upon 
the  cause  of  temperance  ?  Which  do  you  think  has  the  better  effect,  the 
prohibitory  law  on  our  statute  book  as  it  now  stands,  or  a  law  that  should  leave 
to  cities  and  towns  the  question  of  permitting  the  sale  of  liquor  under  such 
restrictions  as  they  shall  see  fit  to  enforce  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  much  about  the  law,  but  it  strikes  me  that  we  have  been 
losing  ground  ever  since  we  left  the  old  system  of  licensing.  I  thought  then 
that  we  were  gaining  ground  and  controlling  intemperance ;  but  since  the  old 
license  system  was  abandoned  and  the  prohibitory  system  introduced,  I  think 
that  we  have  been  losing  ground.  There  has  been  a  flood  of  liquor  let  loose, 
and  a  habit  of  drinking  introduced,  that  is  perfectly  appalling. 

Q.  What  has  been  your  observation  since  the  enactment  of  this  law,  with 
regard  to  the  co-operation  of  moral  and  religious  men  in  promoting  by  moral 
means  the  cause  of  temperance  ? 

A.  I  never  should  have  anything  to  do  with  a  prohibitory  law  nor  with 
anything  of  the  kind,  whether  applied  to  this  thing  or  to  any  other  thing.  I 
have  no  faith  in  that  way  of  facing  things.  It  is  not  the  gospel  way.  Our 
Saviour  came  eating  and  drinking ;  and  the  first  miracle  he  wrought  was  to 
give  the  people  good  wine.  He  wanted  good  wine  to  be  used,  and  to  be  used 
not  for  people  to  get  drunk  with,  but  to  be  used  temperately,  and  to  be  con- 
sidered as  the  good  gift  of  the  gracious  Father. 

Wine-drinking  is  no  new  thing.  The  Germans  have  always  been  given  to 
drinking ;  but  even  when  they  were  yet  barbarians,  they  began  to  control  the 
matter,  not  by  legislation — they  did  not  fancy  that, — but  by  certain  principles 
of  self-respect, — a  certain  sense  of  decorum, — by  a  certain  memory  of  a  good 
home,  a  good  wife,  a  good  mother.  They  have  been  working  and  thinking  in 
that  way  a  thousand  years.  Take  Norway,  where  they  have  long  had  insti- 
tutions similar  to  those  of  the  United  States, — the  right  of  trial  by  jury ;  a 
representative  government,  and  the  general  diffusion  of  education, — take 
Norway,  where  they  have  had  these  things  from  the  remotest  antiquity,  and 
you  will  find  no  drunkenness  there.  Liquor  with  them  is  as  common  as 
ink  on  your  tables  here,  but  they  do  not  abuse  it  so  as  to  get  drunk  with  it- 
It  is  not  the  climate  that  prevents  intemperance  ;  for  the  Laplanders  further 
north  are  a  drunken  set,  and  the  Scotch  and  Swedes,  on  the  same  line  of 
latitude,  are  quite  intemperate  when  compared  with  the  Norwegians.  The 
general  diffusion  of  property,  the  sense  of  self-respect  and  self-respect  that 
property  carries  with  it,  the  idea  of  every  man  that  he  is  the  equal  of 
any  other  man  in  the  eyes  of  the  law,  the  idea  of  trial  by  jury,  and  a  repre- 


228  APPENDIX. 

sentative  government, — all  these  influences  acting  on  the  free  nations  of  the 
north  of  Europe, — all  these  have  tended  to  free  the  people  of  Norway  from 
intemperance  and  leave  room  for  hope  for  America  hereafter. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  I  understand  you  to  say  that  under  the  license 
law,  regulating  and  restraining  the  sale  of  liquor,  things  were  better  than  they 
are  now,  and  that  they  have  been  growing  worse  ever  since  that  law  was 
changed  ? 

A.     That  is  my  impression. 

Q.     How  long  ago  was  that  ? 

A*     I  do  not  remember. 

Q.     Can  you  not  tell  pretty  nearly  ? 

A .  I  do  not  trouble  myself  about  these  laws.  I  have  never  read  the  liquor 
laws. 

Q.  I  should  like  to  have  you  fix  a  date  when  things  were  better  than  they 
now  are  ? 

A .     About  the  time  when  Theodore  Lyman  was  Mayor. 

Q.     Were  they  better  then  than  now  ? 

A.     That  is  my  impression. 

Q.     Do  you  know  how  many  were  licensed  then  ? 

A.  I  never  went  into  those  facts.  I  had  no  time  to  learn  facts  and  figures, 
but  I  have  a  general  impression. 

Q.     Do  you  know  how  long  this  prohibitory  law  has  been  in  force  V 

A.     I  do  not  know  much  about  the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  Then  how  do  you  know  that  it  was  better  under  the  license  law  than  it 
is  under  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.    I  have  a  general  impression  to  that  effect. 

Q.  Can  you  state  whether  the  prohibitory  law  has  been  in  force  five,  ten 
.or  twenty  years  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  have  been  so  busy  saving  drunkards  by  hundreds  and 
thousands,  that  I  have  not  troubled  myself  about  human  legislation. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  old  license  law  "  restraining  and  regulating ; "  what 
facts  have  you  to  show  that  it  did  "  restrain  and  regulate  ?  " 

A.    I  have  my  impression.     I  do  not  suppose  that  I  could  base  it  on  facts. 

Q.    You  cannot  fix  the  date  when  things  were  so  much  better  than  now  ? 

A.    I  never  trouble  myself  about  dates. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  kind  of  a  license  law  was  in  operation  at  the  time 
that  Theodore  Lyman  was  Mayor  ?  v 

A.  I  do  not  know  much  about  it.  I  do  not  care  much  about  licenses.  I 
would  leave  it  as  I  do  money, — I  would  leave  it  free.  I  believe  in  free  trade. 

Q.     You  do  not  believe  in  restraining  men  ? 

A.  I  have  never  had  occasion  to  use  law.  Even  where  a  reformed  drunk- 
ard became  my  greatest  enemy,  I  left  him  in  the  hands  of  God,  and  in  the 
hands  of  these  excellent  representatives  of  the  General  Court. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  me  any  particular  preference  that  you  have  between  the 
license  law  and  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  think  that  you  do  not  carry  out  your  prohibitory  law.  I  find  that 
the  rich  folks  have  their  liquor.  The  man  who  objects  to  my  giving  away  a 
bottle  of  wine  to  a  dying  man,  orders  his  champagne  by  the  dozen. 


APPENDIX.  229 

Q.  I  want  to  know  if  both  rich  and  poor  did  not  get  liquor  under  the 
license  law  ? 

A.  I  dare  say  they  did,  and  they  do  now ;  but  the  rich  get  the  advantage 
of  the  law  now,  and  the  poor  suffer. 

Q.     How  do  the  poor  suffer  ? 

A.  Because  they  see  the  rich  man  in  Mt.  Vernon  Street,  or  somewhere 
else,  getting  and  drinking  his  wine,  and  they  cannot  get  a  single  glass. 

Q.     Why  can't  they  ? 

A .  Because  somebody  would  be  around  to  catch  them  at  it ;  they  would 
break  the  law. 

Q.  Is  the  law  so  strictly  enforced  that  a  poor  man  cannot  get  a  glass  of 
liquor  in  Boston  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  but  my  impression  is,  that  where  you  do  enforce  the  law,  you 
enforce  it  on  the  poor 'people,  the  poor  drinker  and  the  poor  seller. 

Q.     Peter  Brigham  was  a  poor  man  was  he  not  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  whether  he  was  rich  or  poor. 

Q.  You  have  expressed  an  opinion  that  matters  were  better  under  the 
license  law  than  they  are  now, — that  the  license  law  restrained  and  regulated 
the  sale  of  liquor  ;  I  want  you,  if  possible,  to  fix  the  time  when  things  were 
better,  and  also  to  state  what  sort  of  a  license  law  we  had  then  V 

A.  I  never  read  that  law,  nor  this  law,  nor  any  of  your  laws.  I  have 
never  had  occasion  to  use  the  law  at  all.  I  have  prevented  intemperance  in 
thousands  of  cases  without  law. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  under  the  Christian  dispensation  we  are 
under  moral  and  religious  influences  ;  those  are  the  influences  that  you  most 
rely  upon  ? 

A.     Free  grace  and  universal  salvation. 

Q.     You  think  that  is  the  higher  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  it  is  necessary  to  have  a  lower,  as  well  as  a 
higher  law  ? 

A.  We  license  the  sale  of  gunpowder;  I  would  put  the  licensing  of  the 
sale  of  spirits  upon  the  same  footing. 

Q.     What  sort  of  a  license  law  would  you  have  ? 

A.     I  have  never  been  asked  to  make  a  law,  but  I  can  tell  you. 

Q.     Suppose  you  give  us  a  sketch  of  the  law  that  you  would  have  ? 

A.  I  would  take  up  the  idea  of  my  friend  "  Carl,"  in  the  Transcript  of 
last  night.  I  would  have  a  very  brief  law  of,  perhaps,  eight  lines,  that  any- 
body coulc?  read  and  understand,  and  I  would  put  it  in  force,  whether  it  hit 
the  rich  01  the  poor  man. 

Q.    What  would  that  law  in  eight  lines  be  ? 
A.     It  is  not  written  yet. 

Q.     I  would  like  to  see  you  put  it  into  eight  lines.  • 

A.  If  it  will  do  any  good,  I  will  present  a  bill  of  my  own  before  this 
session  closes. 

Q.     Can  you  not  make  a  sketch  of  it,  and  hand  it  to  us  in  a  day  or  two  ? 

A  I  have  never  been  used  to  using  law  at  all,  and  might  cut  ray  fingers 
off  if  I  attempted  it.  I  am  no  lawyer. 


230  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  that  you  do  not  believe  in  law  at  all  to  forward 
moral  reforms  ? 

A.     Not  to  law  as  superior  to  the  law  that  we  have  in  the  gospel. 

Q.     Who  does? 

A.     I  hope  nobody. 

Q.  I  do  not  know  that  anybody  does.  Of  course,  law  amounts  to  little  or 
nothing  independent  of  religious  and  moral  influences. 

A.  I  will  tell  you  how  it  struck  me  when  Lyman  was  mayor.  We  had 
one  of  our  little  parties  for  the  children  going  on  on  the  4th  of  July.  I  went 
to  him  to  get  a  tree.  He  said  that  he  could  give  me  no  tree,  but  would  give 
me  ten  dollars  to  buy  a  tree  with.  He  said,  "  I  bid  you  God-speed.  I  want 
you  to  continue  to  entertain  our  people  for  the  sake  of  preventing  their 
becoming  intemperate  ;  for,"  said  lie,  "  when  I  was  in  Europe,  I  studied  the 
habits  of  the  German  people,  who  have  been  working  upon  that  problem  for  a 
thousand  years,  and  I  was  satisfied,  while  witnessing  the  little  dance  they  had 
on  the  green  by  the  church,  although  it  was  on  Sunday  evening,  where  the 
old  folks  smoked  their  pipes,  and  the  families  were  together,  drinking  their 
beer  and  wine, — I  was  satisfied  that  when  we  did  those  things  in  our  New 
England  villages  we  should  have  a  more  temperate  population." 

Q.     But  you  would  not  rely  upon  dancing  and  amusements  alone  ? 

A.  Our  Saviour  relied  upon  religious  influences,  with  a  corresponding 
grace  of  God  in  the  heart.  He  did  not  look  to  the  law ;  the  law  took  Him 
and  crucified  Him,  and  that  was  the  last  of  the  law,  I  hope. 

Q.  You  say  that  when  our  Saviour  came  He  dispensed  with  the  command 
"  Thou  shalt "  and  "  Thou  shalt  not ; "  but  did  He  not  reply,  when  the  young 
man  inquired  of  Him  how  he  could  enter  the  kingdom  of  Heaven,  "  Keep  the 
commandments  ?  "  The  commandments  say,  "  Thou  shalt  not  kill ; "  "  Thou 
shalt  not  steal ; "  "  Thou  shalt  not  commit  adultery ; "  "  Thou  shalt  not  bear 
false  witness."  Are  not  these  prohibitions  a  part  of  the  Christian  as  well  as 
of  the  Mosaic  dispensation  ?  " 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     If  he  used  them,  shall  not  we  ?  " 

A.     And  then  He  added,  "  Sell  all  thou  hast  and  give  to  the  poor " 

[The  CHAIRMAN  suggested  that  the  discussion  was  wandering  from  the 
subject.  J 

Q.     During  what  years  was  Mr.  Lyman  mayor  of  Boston  ? 

A.  I  do  not  remember.  I  have  a  very  bad  memory  about  figures.  It  is 
very  easy  to  turn  to  the  record  and  see  when  he  was  mayor  of  Boston. 

Q.  If  you  were  told  that  Mr.  Lyman  licensed  six  hundred  persons  in  the 
city  of  Boston  to  sell  liquor,  and  that  there  were  three  or  four  hundred  wh6 
sold  without  license,  would  you  believe  it  ? 

A .  Well,  I  do  not  know.  I  never  took  any  pains  to  look  at  the  figures  in 
connection  with  that  subject. 

Q.  You  made  a  statement,  however,  that  it  was  much  better  under  the 
license,  than  under  the  prohibitory  law.  We  want  to  have  the  facts  on  which 
you  base  your  statement  ? 

A .  I  cannot  give  you  facts  and  figures  ;  I  can  only  give  you  my  general 
impression. 


APPENDIX.  231 

TESTIMONY  OF  SAMUEL  F.  MCCLEARY. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  What  position  do  you  occupy  in  the  city  govern- 
ment. 

A.     I  am  City  Clerk  of  Boston. 

Q.     For  how  many  years  have  you  had  that  office  ? 

A.     The  present  is  my  sixteenth  year  of  service. 

Q.  Will  you  be  good  enough  to  state,  briefly,  the  mode  adopted  by  the 
city  government  in  selecting  jurors  ? 

A.  In  the  month  of  July,  an  order  is  passed  to  have  the  jury  list  revised. 
The  names  of  those  who  have  died,  or  known  to  have  removed  out  of  the 
city  are  taken  off  the  list.  The  remainder  are  then  counted,  and  the  number 
of  jurors  to  which  the  city  is  entitled,  is  ascertained.  That  number  is  divided 
among  the  different  wards  of  the  city  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  voters 
in  those  wards.  The  last  voting  list  is  then  given  to  the  alderman  of  each 
ward,  with  the  request  that  he  will  indicate  thereon,  the  number  of  jurors 
required- from  his  ward,  and  that  indication  is  there  made,  on  the  last  voting 
list.  I  should  state,  however,  that  previous  to  the  voting  lists  being  given  to 
the  aldermen  the  names  thereon,  of  those  who  are  already  in  the  box,  and  of 
those  who  have  served  within  three  years,  are  erased,  so  that  they  shall  not  be 
added  again.  After  those  names  are  indicated  on  the  list,  the  lists  are  handed 
to  me,  and  copies  are  made  by  one  hand  of  all  those  names,  on  little  ballots, 
which  little  ballots  are  then  folded  twice  in  a  uniform  manner,  so  that  no  dis- 
tinction can  be  made  between  them.  Thus  folded,  they  are  placed  in  the 
box,  and  when  a  venire  is  served  upon  the  board  of  aldermen  for  jurors,  two 
aldermen  are  appointed  to  draw  the  required  number.  One  puts  his  hand 
into  the  box,  which  is  so  constructed  that  nothing  but  the  hand  can  go  in, 
and  it  is  impossible  to  see  in  the  box  when  the  hand  is  in,  and  it  is  impossible 
to  select  any  particular  ballot,  or  to  select  any  particular  juror. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  What  knowledge  have  you  of  the  principles  of 
action  on  the  part  of  the  several  aldermen  in  marking  the  names  on  the  list 
given  to  them  ? 

A .  Each  alderman  is  directed  by  me  to  designate  so  many  jurors.  He  is 
cautioned  not  to  designate  those  who  are  exempted  by  the  statute.  All  other 
persons,  of  course,  are  liable  to  be  selected. 

Q.     Are  these  selections  made  with  the  knowledge  of  the  men  themselves  ? 

A.  I  can  only  state  my  opinion  ;  I  do  not  know  the  fact.  The  intention 
of  the  law  undoubtedly  is  that  the  aldermen  will  designate  the  best  men  they 
can  find  in  their  ward. 

Q.     Are  they  required  by  law  to  select  only  good  men? 

A.     That  is  a  question  of  law,  which  you  will  find  answered  in  the  statute. 

Q.  I  supposed  that  you  would  know  whether  there  is  any  law  upon  that 
subject  or  not  ? 

A.  They  are  required,  by  the  language  of  the  venire,  to  draw  men  "  welJ 
qualified,  and  free  from  all  legal  exceptions." 

Q.     Is  that  the  precise  language  ? 

A.     I  think  it  is. 

Q.     Does  the  venire  follow  the  statute  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  as  to  that  point. 


232  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  whether  in  the  discharge  of  this  discretion 
by  the  aldermen,  liquor-sellers  have  been  selected  by  them,  and  their  names 
placed  in  the  jury-list,  so  that  they  are  liable  to  be  drawn  on  the  traverse 
jury  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  The  names  of  liquor-dealers  have  been  put  into  the  box.  I 
do  not  believe,  however,  that  they  were  selected  upon  that  account, — because 
they  were  liquor-dealers. 

Q.  But  you  know  that  men  were  selected  who  were  known  to  be  liquor- 
dealers  ? 

A.     I  presume  they  were  known  to  be. 

Q.  Have  you  known  any  instances  where,  in  certain  sections  of  a  ward, 
as  in  Ward  7,  or  in  any  of  the  lower  wards  of  the  city,  where  the  greater 
number  of  the  men  selected  by  the  aldermen  for  a  number  of  years,  have 
been  liquor-dealers  ? 

A.    I  am  not  aware  of  any  such  instances. 

Q.  Have  you  any  such  knowledge  upon  the  subject,  as  would  enable  you 
to  say,  that  nothing  of  that  sort  has  occurred  ? 

A.     No,  sir ;  I  could  not  say  that  nothing  of  the  sort  has  occurred. 

Q.  You  are  aware,  however,  that  it  has  not  been  an  uncommon  thing  to 
select  liquor-dealers  as  jurors  ? 

A.  I  know  that  liquor-dealers  have  been  put  into  the  jury-box.  Such 
men,  for  instance,  as  Parker  and  Richards. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  men  are  put  in  there  who  are  so  well  known  as 
liquor-dealers,  that  they  could  not  be  put  in  without  the  knowledge  of  the 
fact  that  they  were  liquor-dealers  ? 

A.     I  presume  such  well  known  men,  would  be  known  to  be  liquor-dealers. 

Q.     Has  it  not  been  very  common,  very  usual,  to  select  such  men  ? 

A.  '  Mr.  Parker's  name  was  put  in  the  jury-box, but  cannot  be  put  in  again 
for  three  years  more.  When  the  three  years  arc  past,  he  being  a  prominent 
individual  in  his  ward  would  probably  be  again  selected. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  is  as  much  care  to  select  men  of  prominence  in 
the  community  who  are  not  liquor-dealers,  as  there  is  to  select  such  men  who 
are  liquor-dealers  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  that  enters  into  the  choice  of  the  aldermen  at  all. 

Q.  Then  how  should  it  happen  that  the  aldermen  should  be  watchful  to  sec 
•when  such  men  as  Harvey  D.  Parker  and  Henry  Richards,  could  be  put  in  again  ? 

A.  Richards  would  be  taken  as  soon  as  Parker.  They  take  men  known 
to  them,  prominent  individuals,  men  of  influence  and  good  judgment. 

Q.  Do  they,  as  you  are  aware,  make  any  objection  to  a  man  because  he  is 
a  liquor-dealer  ?. 

A.  Liquor  cases  are  not  the  only  ones  tried.  They  make  no  objection  to 
any  man  on  account  of  his  business. 

Q.  Do  they  put  counterfeiters  on  the  jury,  because  there  are  counterfeiters 
to  be  tried  ? 

A.     I  am  not  aware  of  it. 

Q.     Or  gamblers  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  we  have  any. 

Q.     Have  you  any  gamblers'  names  on  the  list  ? 


APPENDIX.  233 

A.    I  have  no  acquaintance  with  any  of  that  class. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  their  number  is  so  few  that  there  are  no  names  of 
gamblers  on  the  list  ? 

A.     If  so  they  are  unknown  to  me. 

Q.     And  unknown  to  the  aldermen  ? 

A.     I  should  hope  so. 

Q.     Do  you  suppose  that  there  could  be  none  found  in  the  jury-list  ? 

A.  I  venture  to  say  that  there  are  none.  I  do  not  think  that  any  alderman 
would  put  the  name  of  a  man  on  the  jury-list  whom  he  knew  to  be  a  gambler. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  or  not  the  names  of  gamblers  on  the  voting 
lists  have  ever  been  selected  as  jurors  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  of  any  gamblers  at  all. 

TESTIMONY  OF  CHARLES  RUSSELL. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.     In  Princeton,  county  of  Worcester. 

Q.     How  low  have  you  resided  there  ? 

A.    I  have  always  resided  there. 

Q.  I  would  inquire  of  you,  from  your  own  observation  in  the  county  of 
Worcester,  as  to  the  condition  of  things  in  regard  to  intemperance,  for  the 
last  ten  or  fifteen  years,  under  a  prohibitory  liquor  law. 

A.  I  can  speak  only  of  my  own  town.  I  am  not  abroad  much  and  do 
not  know  what  may  be  the  condition  of  the  neighboring  towns.  I  think, 
however,  that  in  the  town  where  I  reside,  intemperance  has  been  rather  on 
an  increase  for  some  years  past.  I  will  here  state  that  my  own  impression 
has  been  for  a  number  of  years,  and  now  is,  that  a  license  law  would  be 
better  than  a  prohibitory  law.  I  do  not  wish,  in  saying  this,  to  be  misunder- 
stood. I  do  not  desire  to  go  back  to  the  old  license  law  as  it  existed  fifty 
years  ago,  but  I  mean  such  a  license  law  as  was  in  operation  at  the  commence- 
ment of  the  temperance  reform.  I  attended  the  first  temperance  meeting  that 
was  ever  held  in  the  town  of  Princeton,  to  my  knowledge,  and  that  was  more 
than  fifty  years  ago.  It  was  called  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Murdoch,  and  the  cause 
of  temperance  was  advocated  in  that  meeting. 

Q.  Confine  yourself  as  much  as  you  can  to  the  comparative  merits  of  the 
two  systems  of  legislation. 

A.  I  was  going  to  say  that  I  think  the  temperance  reform  in  that  place 
dated  from  that  meeting. 

Q.  In  your  opinion,  has  there  been  the  same  amount  of  effort  by  moral 
means,  put  forth  for  the  suppression  of  intemperance,  since  the  enactment  of 
the  prohibitory  law  that  there  was  before  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  there  has. 

Q.    Is  that  your  opinion  generally  in  regard  to  the  county  of  Worcester  ? 

A.     I  have  no  doubt  that  is  the  fact. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  How  long  since  you  have  had  a  license  up  there 
in  that  town? 

30 


234  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  am  not  able  to  say,  but  I  should  think  it  might  be  over  thirty  years 
since  a  license  was  granted.  . 

Q.  How  did  the  law  operate  when  licenses  were  granted  in  Worcester 
County  ? 

A  When  the  temperance  reform  commenced  the  retailers  of  spirituous 
liquors  began  to  give  up  the  sale  of  it,  the  selectmen,  in  many  towns  refusing 
to  approbate.  I  suppose  you  are  familiar  with  the  manner  of  licensing  in  the 
olden  times.  The  application  required  the  approbation  of  the  selectmen, 
certifying  that  the  applicant  was  of  good  moral  character. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  think  there  is  more  intemperance  now  than  there  was 
before  you  had  any  prohibitory  liquor  law  ;  will  you  please  to  fix  the  dates 
and  state  at  what  time  there  was  less  intemperance  than  now  ? 

A.  I  can  speak  only  for  my  own  town,  but  I  think  intemperance  has 
increased  ever  since  the  retail  trade  was  entirely  stopped.  There  were  three 
stores  in  that  town  that  retailed  spirituous  liquors  at  the  time  the  temperance 
reform  commenced.  First  one  did  not  ask  for  a  license,  and  quit  the  sale. 
Then  another  dropped  off.  Another  continued  to  sell,  but  he  was  more  cau- 
tious after  that,  a  little  more  particular  to  whom  he  sold  liquor,  and  the  last 
year  that  he  sold  he  refused  to  sell  to  any  one  unless  for  medical  purposes,  as 
the  agents  now  sell.  The  consequence  was  that  people  would  send  out  of 
town  for  it, — they  would  send  a  keg  to  Boston  and  get  five  gallons  at  a  time. 

Q.     Was  that  a  very  common  thing  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say.  It  was  the  practice  of  a  great  many  and  is  now.  Nobody 
can  sell  it  there ;  but  my  opinion  is  that  most  of  the  people  now  use  it  in  some 
form.  Those  who  use  it  to  excess  find  a  thousand  facilities  for  getting  it  from 
Boston.  Even  in  Princeton,  where  we  have  to  go  six  miles  to  reach  a  rail- 
road, they  find  ways  of  sending  to  Boston  for  it.  There  is  a  market  wagon 
running  here  every  week,  there  are  stage-coaches  connecting  with  the  rail- 
road, and,  in  addition,  there  are  every-day  teams  carting  wood  and  lumber 
into  Worcester,  so  that  they  have  every  facility  for  sending  where  they  can 
obtain  this  liquor,  and  instead  of  going  to  the  store,  as  they  did  thirty  years 
ago  and  getting  a  pure  article,  they  now  get  what  I  suppose  is  adulterated. 

Q.  Then  the  stopping  of  the  sale  in  Princeton  was  no  great  advantage, 
when  they  can  send  to  Boston  and  get  it  ? 

A.  Some  think  that  if  they  had  continued  to  sell  as  they  did  at  the  time 
the  sale  was  stopped,  that  there  would  have  been  as  much  intemperance  in 
Princeton  as  there  is  now. 

Q.  Suppose  that  the  law  should  be  enforced  here,  so  that  they  could  not 
buy  the  five  gallons  of  liquor  to  carry  home  ;  suppose  that  when  you  have  no 
sale  there,  it  should  be  stopped  in  Boston  also,  would  it  not  be  a  great 
improvement  ? 

A.  If  you  can  entirely  stop  the  trade  in  Boston  and  everywhere  else,  we 
do  not  know  what  they  would  resort  to.  You  can  answer  as  well  as  I, 
whether  stopping  the  sale  takes  away  the  appetite  and  the  desire  of  men  for 
liquor,  and  whether  a  dozen  men  might  not  club  together  in  that  event,  and 
send  even  to  New  York  to  get  a  barrel  of  whiskey. 


APPENDIX.  235 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  a  great  majority  of  people  drink  when  they  have  no 
particular  appetite,  and  only  because  it  is  in  their  way,  or  because  they  are 
invited  in  a  social  way  to  take  a  glass  ? 

A.  Not  so  much  now  as  formerly.  In  former  times  it  was  customary  to 
use  spirits  even  at  funerals.  I  have  seen  seventy-four  years,  and  I  can  look 
back  a  good  ways,  and  I  can  recollect  when  I  was  a  boy  of  going  to  funerals? 
and  seeing  rum  passed  around  to  the  mourners.  That  thing  is  now  done 
away.  I  do  not  believe  there  is  a  town  in  the  county  of  Worcester  where  the 
people,  arc  more  temperate  than  they  are  in  Princeton  ;  but  I  think  there  has 
been  some  change  there.  I  think  the  people  now  use  cider  more  than  they 
did  before  the  temperance  reform  commenced. 

Q.     Do  you  know  of  any  intemperance  resulting  from  the  use  of  cider  ? 

A.     I  do  not,  nor  from  wine. 

Q.  Did  you  ever,  from  your  observation,  know  of  any  case  of  intemperance 
resulting  from  the  use  of  cider  ? 

A.  A  great  many  years  ago,  I  recollect  some  old  strollers  that  came 
around  among  the  farmers,  and  the  farmers  would  give  them  cider  to  get  rid 
of  them,  and  sometimes  they  would  get  drunk. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  of  some  pretty  respectable  mechanics  and  farmers  that 
used  to  drink  cider  to  great  excess  ? 

A.     They  would  be  considered  now  as  drinking  to  excess. 

Q.     Have  you  not  seen  even  respectable  people  intoxicated  with  cider  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  I  ever  did  see  what  I  would  call  a  respectable 
person  intoxicated  with  cider. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  the  farther  away  liquor  is  put,  and  the  more  out  of 
sight  it  is,  the  less  temptation  there  is  to  drink  ? 

A.  It  is  a  question  with  me,  whether  you  could  put  it  far  enough  away  to 
remove  the  temptation.  I  suppose,  of  course,  if  a  man  could  not  possibly  get 
any  liquor  in  any  way,  he  would  not  use  it. 

Q.  I  want  you  to  fix  the  time,  as  definitely  as  you  can,  when  things  were 
so  much  better  than  they  are  now  ? 

A .  About  fifteen  years  ago.  That,  I  believe,  was  about  the  time  that  the 
prohibitory  liquor  law  commenced  operation.  When  the  fifteen-gallon  law 
was  passed,  there  was  a  reaction  in  the  town  of  Princeton  at  the  very  next 
election. 

Q.  You  say  that  fifteen  years  ago  things  were  better  than  now,  and  that 
intemperance  has  increased  since  that  time  ? 

A.  I  think  that  there  is  more  intemperance  now  than  there  was  fifteen 
years  ago. 

Q.    What  sort  of  a  law  did  you  have  fifteen  years  ago  ? 

A.  There  were  no  licenses  granted.  I  believe  that  the  old  license  law  was 
upon  the  statute  book,  but  the  county  commissioners  refused  to  license. 

Q.  You  had,  therefore,  a  prohibitory  law  then,  when  you  say  things  were 
better  than  now  ? 

A.     The  operation  of  the  law  was  prohibitory. 

Q.  And  had  been  so  for  fifteen  years  previous  to  the  enactment  of  the 
present  law  ? 

A.    About  that  time. 


236  APPENDIX. 

Q.     So  that  that  good  state  of  things  was  under  a  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  Its  effect  was  the  same  as  a  prohibitory  law.  The  law  was  varied 
according  to  circumstances  and  time  and  place. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion,  theoretically,  as  to  total  abstinence  from  intoxi- 
cating drinks  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  My  opinion  is  that  a  man  may  take  moderately  of  wine,  or  any  other 
intoxicating  drinks,  without  any  very  serious  injury  to  his  morals  or  to  his 
health. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EDWARD  H.  SAVAGE. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  How  long  have  you  been  connected  with  the 
police  ? 

A.     This  is  my  seventeenth  year. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  attached  to  the  City  Hall  as  Deputy  Chief? 

A.     Six  years. 

Q.     And  before  that  you  were  a  Captain  of  Police  ? 

A.  Four  years  I  was  patrolman  on  the  street,  night  and  day,  and  for  seven 
years  had  charge  of  Station  No.  1.  For  seven  years  I  have  been  police 
officer. 

Q.  Have  you  taken  any  pains  to  observe  the  operation  of  our  laws  and  the 
effect  produced  by  the  attempt  to  administer  the  laws  in  reference  to  the  sale 
of  ardent  spirits  upon  the  habits  of  the  people  of  Boston,  in  respect  to 
drunkenness  ? 

A.  During  my  experience  as  an  officer  I  have  had.  an  opportunity  for 
observation. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  to  the  Committee,  as  briefly  as  you 
can,  what  you  have  observed,  and  the  results  to  which  you  have  arrived,  and 
if  you  have  made  any  calculations,  or  have  any  statistics  at  your  command, 
please  produce  them  ? 

A.  I  have  made  some  observations  in  relation  to  the  drunkenness  which 
has  necessarily  come  under  my  observation,  and  produced  an  effect  upon  my 
mind.  Since  I  have  been  in  the  service,  I  have  kept  a  copy  of  the  printed 
reports  of  the  Chief  of  Police,  for  each  year  since  1850,  and  have  taken  pains 
to  have  them  bound  in  a  book,  which  is,  I  suppose,  the  only  full  copy  that 
there  is  in  existence.  When  this  question  came  up,  feeling  a  good  deal  of 
interest  in  the  matter,  for  my  own  curiosity  I  made  a  table  to  sec  as  near  as 
can  be  the  relative  condition  of  things,  and  since  I  have  been  summoned  to 
testify  here,  I  have  made  some  addition  to  the  table. 

Q.     Will  you  please  to  state  the  result  of  your  observations  ? 

A .  The  police  of  Boston  became  an  executive  power,  so  far  as  police  mat- 
ters were  concerned,  in  1854.  Prior  to  that  time  the  force  were  divided 
between  the  watch  and  the  police,  the  police  were  day  officers  and  the  watch 
•were  night  officers.  I  have  no  records  prior  to  1854,  when  the  two  depart- 
ments were  organized  in  one.  I  have  made  a  table,  beginning  with  the  year 
1854,  and  ending  with  the  close  of  the  year  1866.  The  table  which  I  have, 
shows  how  many  liquor  shops  there  have  been,  and  what  has  been  the  course 
pursued  in  regard  to  them,  and  what  the  facts  were  in  relation  to  the  vice  of 


APPENDIX.  237 

drunkenness.  In  the  table,  I  have  given  each  year,  the  population,  either 
estimated  or  recorded,  and  the  number  of  arrests. 

Q.     The  number  of  arrests  for  what  ? 

A.  For  all  kinds  of  crime.  The  number  of  arrests,  the  number  of  lodgers, 
the  total  number  of  drunken  cases,  &c.,  are  given.  In  1864,  you  will  remem- 
ber, that  the  Chief  testified,  it  was  ordered  that  those  parties  who  were 
arrested,  and  were  but  partially  drunk,  and  whom  it  was  thought  proper  and 
humane  to  discharge,  should  be  classed  amongst  "  lodgers."  These  are,  there- 
fore, here  put  down  as  lodgers,  although  under  the  influence  of  liquor.  From 
an  examination  of  the  books  and  from  my  own  knowledge,  I  believe  that  at 
least  one-half  of  those  designated  as  lodgers  in  the  reports  of  the  captains  and 
lieutenants,  were  more  or  less  under  the  influence  of  intoxicating  drinks. 

I  have  also  taken  from  the  books  a  statement  for  the  months  of  January 
and  February  of  the  present  year. 

At  the  suggestion  of  the  Chief  of  Police,  on  last  Sunday  I  requested  the 
captains  to  furnish  me  with  a  statement  of  the  arrests  for  that  day.  In  our 
records,  a  day  is  usually  considered  as  commencing  at  eight  o'clock  in  the 
morning  and  ending  at  eight  o'clock  on  the  following  morning;  but  on  that 
day,  (Sunday,)  the  arrests  reported  were  made  between  twelve  o'clock 
Saturday  night  and  twelve  o'clock  Sunday  night,  showing  the  arrests  for 
drunkenness  during  the  actual  hours  of  Sunday. 

Captain  Savage  offered  the  following  tabular  statement : — 


- 


fi- 
ll 

ii 


- 
s 


CS  CS  CS  C5  CS 
*»COtOi—  'O 


§^! 


o  oo  i 

:88: 


I 


83 


J 


"c^^ilss  oo"bo"bs"co">-i";o"co"o  §  3 
~JN>a»«D!00>S5b»®t;««  » 


"bo  w  "o  "p  cj»  "*•  to 


O  H- 
S  00 


1 


I- 

S 

a 

3 


'S    S3 

cooS?  »»?«?? 


o  to  4-  *»•  -^i  o  c->  *»  to 

tOCOC»l-»WWC««M 


0 

0 


CO  CO 

h-I   QO 

too 


jo  to 

CO  M 


O  "-1 

"•i!  '"' 

r 


—  1  ~C5  "o  OC  C^ 

OO  OT  CS  i—  '  CO 


- 

•>-!  C5  i—  ' 
OiCS--! 


.  to  tO  M  k-i  w*  j-i  . 
I C   t~i 


MN>l-H-'l-*         0^ 


II 


ii 


i 


3  C 

$9     £3 

n 


APPENDIX.  239 

Number  of  prosecutions  by  the  City  Police,  from  1854  to  1866,        .  2,172 

By  the  State  Police, 3,093 

Number  of  liquor-places  reported  by  the  State  Police  for  the  year 

1806, 690 

Number  of  prosecutions  by  the  State  Police  for  the  week  ending 

March  3d,  1866, 35 

Number  of  seizures,          .        .        . 36 

Number  of  places  closed, .    - 33 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Is  there  any  opinion  which  your  experience  as  a 
police  officer  in  Boston,  for  all  these  years,  leads  you  to  form,  and  which  you 
are  able  to  give,  for  the  purpose  of  assisting  the  legislative  mind  in  reaching 
a  wise  conclusion  as  to  the  best  method  of  dealing  with  th'e  subject  of 
intemperance  ? 

A.  I  do  not  suppose  that  any  opinion  of  mine  on  the  subject  can  be  of 
much  use.  Although  I  believe  that  during  the  past  year  the  State  officers 
have  done  there  duty  faithfully,  and  have  no  doubt  followed  the  policy  of  the 
government,  yet  the  conclusion  that  I  have  arrived  at  is  this :  that  the  whole 
proceeding  of  the  Executive,  in  relation  to  this  matter,  has  not  made  any 
difference.  If  you  ask  me  why,  I  will  simply  answer,  that  any  one  who 
knows  Boston  at  all,  knows  that  any  man  who  has  a  shilling  in  his  pocket  can 
go  out  and  obtain  rum  enough  to  get  drunk  upon. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  The  liquor  places  in  Boston  are  now  all  closed 
on  Sunday,  are  they  not  ? 

A.  Last  Sunday,  afternoon  I  took  a  walk  through  the  streets  to  see  if  I 
could  find  any  places  open.  I  found  none  of  the  places  open  that  are  usually 
kept  open  on  week  days.  I  inquired  of  the  dfficers  in  relation  to  it,  and  they 
told  me  that  they  presumed  that  none  of  the  places  usually  kept  open  on  week- 
day were  now  open  on  Sunday. 

Q.  Were  any  of  the  bars  in  eating-houses,  so  far  as  you  know,  kept  open 
on  Sunday  ? 

A.  Not  that  I  know  of.  It  may  be  that  they  have  sometimes  violated  the 
Sunday  law ;  but  I  think  that,  as  a  general  thing,  the  places  usually  open 
for  the  sale  of  liquor  on  week  days,  were  closed  on  Sunday,  during  the 
past  year. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  I  understood  you  to  say,  in  reply  to  a  question 
by  Gov.  Andrew,  that  all  systems  have  failed  to  restrain  intemperance  ? 

A.  I  did  not  say  that :  far  from  it.  I  said  that  so  far  as  the  execution  of 
the  law  had  operated  upen  the  vice  of  drunkenness,  it  seemed  to  me  that  it 
had  had  no  effect.  It  seems  that  from  the  year  1854  up  to  the  present  time, 
there  has  been  a  gradual  increase  of  intemperance,  notwithstanding  the  faith- 
fulness with  which  the  law  has  been  executed  the  past  year.  I  gave,  as  a 
reason,  that  any  man  who  had  a  shilling,  could  obtain  liquor  enough  to  get 
drunk. 

Q.  Nobody  supposes  that  this  sale  of  liquor  has  been  restricted  as  yet 
under  the  State  Police ;  but  suppose  they  continue  to  close  thirty  or  forty 
places  per  week.  What  will  be  the  state  of  things  by  and  by  ? 


240  APPENDIX. 

A.  If  you  ask  my  opinion  upon  that,  I  answer,  that  I  cannot  foresee  the 
result.  I  think  that  the  whole  matter  as  yet  is  an  experiment.  It  seems  to 
me  that  there  are  but  two  ways  to  suppress  this  great  evil.  One  way  is,  to 
make  liquor  so  scarce  that  an  intemperate  man  cannot  get  it ;  and  the  other 
is,  to  place  it  in  the  hands  of  those  who  will  not  abuse  the  sale  of  it. 

Q.  Would  it  not  be  a  great  blessing  to  make  it  so  scarce  that  the  young 
people  cannot  get  it,  and  acquire  the  habit  of  drinking  ? 

A.  I  do  not  consider  that  a  liquor-stand  would  be  any  more  of  an  evil  than 
an  apple-stand,  if  nobody  used  the  liquor  to  the  detriment  of  their  health  and 
happiness. 

Q.  But  when  liquor-shops  are  so  plentiful  that  anybody  can  get  it,  is  not 
the  temptation  so  great  that  many  will  use  liquor  to  their  detriment,  who 
would  not  use  'at  all  if  it  was  out  of  their  way  ? 

A.     There  is  no  question  about  that. 

Q.     Then  the  policy  is  to  get  them  out  of  the  way  ? 

A.  I  say  that  I  can  see  but  two  ways  to  remedy  the  evil.  One  is  to  make 
liquor  so  scarce,  that  people  who  would  use  it  as  they  ought  not  to  cannot  get 
it ;  and  the  other  is,  to  put  it  in  the  hands  of  men  who  will  not  abuse  the  sale. 
Both  ways  are  still  an  experiment.  I  do  not  understand  that,  as  yet,  it  has 
been  the  policy  of  either  the  municipal  or  the  State  government  to  make 
seizures  on  wholesale  dealers.  Therein  remains  the  experiment  of  the  present 
law.  What  the  effect  would  be  if  the  State  Constabulary  were  to  seize  a 
hundred  thousand  dollars  worth  of  liquor  at  a  time  remains  to  be  seen. 

Q.  But  do  you  not  know  that  you  cannot  seize  liquor  kept  in  that  quantity  ? 
It  is  kept  according  to  the  law. 

A.  I  believe  that  a  man  who  keeps  liquor,  and  sells  it  continually,  comes 
under  that  law,  whether  the  sale-  is  in  large  or  small  quantities.  I  do  not 
think  that  it  is  claimed  by  any  one  that  the  present  law  has  been  fully  tried. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  any  serious  attempt  has  been  made  to  enforce  the 
law? 

A.  The  policy  of  the  city  government  and  the  policy  of  the  State 
seemed  at  first  to  be  about  the  same  ;  but  the  complaints  and  seizures  of  late 
do  not  seem  to  have  struck  at  the  root  of  the  matter. 

Q.  Do  you  say  that  the  policy  of  the  city  and  of  the  State  have  been 
about  the  same,  when  the  city  prosecutes  but  forty-eight  cases  per  year  under 
the  Nuisance  Act,  and  makes  no  seizures,  and  the  State  Police  prosecutes 
some  thousands  of  cases,  and  makes  ten  or  twenty  seizures  per  week  ? 

A.  The  Chief  of  Police,  when  he  was  on  the  stand,  explained  that  it  was 
an  agreement  between  him  and  the  State  Constabulary,  that  the  Constabulary 
of  the  Commonwealth  should  be  intrusted  with  the  liquor  cases, — that  he 
would  give  up  the  liquor  business  to  them,  and  that  that  was  the  reason  the  city 
police  record  shows  but  forty-eight  prosecutions,  while  that  of  the  Constabulary 
shows  three  thousand.  I  supposed  that  it  was  the  policy  of  the  State  to  begin 
with  the  smaller  dealers  and  to  strike  at  the  larger  ones  afterwards.  If  it  had 
been  the  policy  of  the  city,  it  would  have  been  done.  I  have  no  doubt  but  that 
the  State  Constabulary,  with  its  thirty  men,  and  the  city  police,  with  its  force, 
could  execute  the  law  in  any  given  case.  I  have  seen  no  difficulty  in  obtain- 


APPENDIX.  241 

ing  evidence.    What  I  mean  by  similar  policy  is,  that  neither  the  city  nor  the 
State  have  struck  at  the  larger  dealers. 

Q.  If  you  were  the  commander  of  an  .army,  you  would  attack  your  enemy 
in  the  weakest  point. 

A.  I  should  carry  out  the  policy  of  my  government.  If  I  had  discre- 
tionary powers,  I  should,  of  course,  use  those  powers. 

Q.    But  you  complain 

A.  I  do  not  complain  of  anything.  I  am  very  well  satisfied  with  what  the 
State  Constables  have  done,  and  I  have  never  yet  said  that  I  should  not  like 
to  see  them  do  more. 

Q.  But  you  referred  to  the  fact  that  they  have  not  taken  the  largest 
dealers.  The  State  Police  commenced  with  thirty-nine  men.  I  think  they 
now  have  sixty-nine  men.  Of  course  you  are  aware  that  it  is  a  force  utterly 
inadequate  to  do  the  whole  business.  Have  they  not  thus  far  pursued  a 
proper  policy  ?  Was  it  not  an  exercise  of  sound  discretion  for  them  to  say : 
"  We  cannot  do  the  whole  of  this  work  at  once ;  we  will  do  that  part  which 
is  easiest  to  be  done,  and  which  will  do  the  most  good  ;  we  will  first  strike 
at  the  lesser  dealers,  who  are  less  responsible,  and  who  sell  to  the  poor 
and  make  families  miserable.  We  will  first  shut  them  up,  and  then  go  to  the 
others?" 

A.  I  have  no  fault  to  find  with  the  State  Police.  I  know  Captain  Jones 
well,  and  I  believe  that  he  will  carry  out  the  policy  of  his  government,  what- 
ever it  is.  I  have  never  found  any  difficulty  in  executing  any  law  intrusted 
to  me  as  an  executive  officer  of  the  city  of  Boston,  with  one  exception,  and 
that  was  during  the  riot,  and  then  we  were  not  strong  enough. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  spoke  of  having  no  discretion  in  this  matter. 
Do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  police  have  never  had  full  authority  to  proceed 
in  the  execution  of  the  law  ? 

A.  What  I  meant  to  say  was,  that  as  an  executive  officer,  I  would  follow 
the  policy  of  my  government. 

Q.  As  a  policeman,  with  a  prohibitory  liquor  law  on  the  statute  book,  who 
is  your  authority  ? 

A .  My  superior  officer,  the  Chief  of  Police,  and  he  is  under  the  direction 
of  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen  of  Boston. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.^)  You  spoke  of  two  policies — one  was  to  suppress 
the  traffic,  so  that  it  would  be  impracticable  to  obtain  liquor,  and  the  other 
was  to  put  its  sale  into  the  hands  of  respectable  persons>  who  would  not  abuse 
it? 

A.    I  did  not  use  the  word  " respectable,"  but  it  is  very  proper. 

Q.     You  call  the  keepers  of  our  first-class  hotels  respectable,  do  you  not  ? 

A .    Many  of  them  are  highly  so. 

Q.  Do  not  those  whom  you  call  "  highly  respectable "  keep  bar-rooms 
where  anybody  can  go  in  and  get  a  drink  ? 

A.    I  think,  as  a  general  thing,  that  at  any  of  our  hotels  any  person  who 
wants  a  glass  of  liquor  can  get  it.    I  had  no  reference  to  any  particular  class 
of  persons.    I  presume  you  and  I  know  that  there  are  persons  in  the  Com- 
monwealth to  whom  it  would  be  safe  to  trust  the  sale  of  liquor. 
31 


242  APPENDIX. 

Q.  The  question  is  whether  a  "respectable"  man  would  keep  a  bar-room 
open  for  anybody  to  go  in  and  drink  ? 

A.  I  said  that  I  could  only  see  those  two  ways  of  suppressing  intemper- 
ance. I  did  not  give  an  opinion  as  to  which  was  the  better. 

Q.    I  want  to  test  both  of  them  ? 

A.  I  can  give  you  no  opinion  that  would  aid  you.  They  are  both  experi- 
ments with  me,  and  I  am  not  yet  satisfied  in  my  own  mind  which  is  the  better 
way.  It  is  a  great  evil,  and  its  suppression  worthy  the  best  efforts  of  good 
men. 

Q.  In  regard  to  your  statistics  of  drunkenness — the  number  of  cases  vary 
•  every  year  ? 

A.     Ye?,  sir. 

Q.     They  increase  rather  more  than  the  population  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  the  present  year  is  rather  larger  than  '65  or  '64. 

Q.     Is  it  larger  than  '63  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  1861  and  1863  are  the  two  largest  years. 

Q.  You  make  the  number  of  cases  in  the  year  1865  between  fifteen  and 
sixteen  thousand.  His  honor  the  Mayor,  and  the  Chief  of  Police  made  the 
number  between  fourteen  and  fifteen  thousand.  Do  you  know  how  that 
discrepancy  happens  ? 

A.  I  made  the  first  table,  and  I  made  it  as  I  told  you  in  the  first  place,  out 
of  curiosity.  On  the  morning  that  the  Mayor  was  summoned  to  testify,  he 
came  in  and  asked  me  if  I  had  any  statistics.  I  showed  him  the  table  I  had 
made,  but  told  him  I  had  not  examined  as  thoroughly  as  I  would  like  to  do, 
and  was  not  satisfied  as  to  its  accuracy.  Since  then  I  have  taken  the  advice 
of  other  officers,  and.  have  also  looked  over  the  records  again.  I  satisfied 
myself  that  one-half  of  those  classed  as  lodgers  were  more  or  less  intoxicated, 
and  that  estimate  is  corroborated  by  the  record  of  last  Sunday  night. 

Q.  Then  it  seems  that  one-half  of  these  are  called  "  drunkards,"  from  a 
sort  of  estimate  of  what  proportion  of  lodgers  were  in  a  state  of  intoxication  ? 

A.     Last  Sunday  night  I  made  the  estimate  from  actual  count. 

Q.     But,  whatever  basis  you  have,  it  is,  after  all,  but  a  sort  of  a  guess  ? 

A.  It  is  an  estimate.  Last  Sunday  I  gave  orders  to  the  police  captains  to 
mark  the  number  of  lodgers  that  were  drunk.  They  arrested  91.  Of  those 
arrested,  38  were  drunk.  They  had  56  lodgers,  and  of  that  number  they  say 
that  32  were  under  the  influence  of  liquor,  which  is  a  little  more  than  half. 
This  is  but  one  of  the  estimates  that  I  can  give  you. 

Q.     But,  after  all,  it  is  a  very  inaccurate  estimate  ? 

A.  I  believe  it  to  be  as  near  correct  as  it  can  possibly  be  made ;  but  it  is 
an  estimate,  as  I  told  you  in  the  first  place. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  great  deal  of  difference  of  opinion  among  different  men 
as  to  when  a  man  may  really  be  said  to  be  drunk  ? 

A .     There  may  be,  although  there  need  not  be  among  officers. 

Q.  During  the  time  that  you  have  been  a  member  of  the  police  organiza- 
tion, has  there  not  been  a  diversity  of  opinion  in  regard  to  this  matter  ?  For 
instance,  in  some  periods,  have  they  not  called  men  intoxicated,  whom  they 
would  not  have  considered  intoxicated  at  other  times  ? 


APPENDIX.  243 

A.  So  I  have  stated,  that  since  1864  we  call  thousands  of  men  "  lodgers  " 
who  were  really  under  the  influence  of  liquor,  and  who  would  have  been  called 
drunk  under  the  former  rules. 

Q.  Ten  or  fifteen  years  ago,  when  there  were  fewer  cases  of  drunkenness, 
were  they  not  accustomed  to  take  up  these  "  lodgers,"  and  merely  call  them 
"  lodgers,"  and  say  nothing  about  their  condition  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  After  1852,  when  we  arrested  men  for  drunkenness,  the  rule 
generally  was  to  commit  them  and  complain  of  them,  although  there  were 
exceptions  to  that  rule.  In  1851,  as  night-policeman,  I  do  not  know  much 
about  the  custom,  as  we  had  instructions  not  to  make  arrests  for  drunk- 
enness unless  it  was  particularly  necessary. 

Q.    In  1852,  then,  there  was  a  different  policy  from  what  there  was  before  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  not  a  different  policy  in  this  respect.  I  only  know  what  the 
rule  was  in  1852.  It  commenced  about  the  time  that  the  law  of  1852  went 
into  force.  I  went  on  the  day  force  about  that  time,  and  knew  more  about 
this  matter  than  I  did  previously. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  FAY.)  Does  not  the  rule  hold  good,  to  discharge  men  if  they 
will  tell  where  they  got  their  liquor  ? 

A.  That  is  a  matter  that  I  cannot  speak  of,  as  I  see  very  few  of  the  per- 
sons who  are  arrested.  My  impression  is,  however,  that  of  late  years  it  has 
not  been  the  general  custom  to  give  them  that  privilege.  There  was  a  time 
when  an  effort  was  made, — when  I  made  it  myself, — to  get  parties  who  were 
arrested  for  drunkenness,  to  testify  against  those  who  sold  them  liquor,  but  we 
did  not  have  very  good  luck  in  getting  evidence  in  that  way. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  But  can  you  not  get  evidence  in  any  case  you 
wish? 

A.     Generally  speaking,  we  can ;  in  some  cases  we  cannot. 

Q.  On  the  whole,  as  the  matter  now  stands,  do  you  not  think  it  would  be 
as  well  to  let  the  State  Police  go  on  with  their  experiment,  before  we  go  back 
to  the  old  experiment  of  licenses  again  ? 

A.  I  am  in  the  dark  about  that.  If  the  State  Police  should  carry  out 
this  experiment,  (for  I  think  that  their  policy  is  not  yet  fully  tested,)  and 
should  make  seizures  upon  our  wholesale  dealers,  it  is  impossible  to  state  what 
the  result  would  be,  but  I  do  not  care  to  give  an  opinion  in  a  matter  that  I  am 
myself  so  much  in  the  dark  about. 

Q.  You  say  that  in  your  judgment  the  State  Police  are  pursuing  their 
work  faithfully  ? 

A.  I  make  no  question  about  that.  I  think  that  Major  Jones  is  doing  his 
work  faithfully. 

TESTIMONY  OF  E.  B.  PATCH. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)    Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.  In  Lowell. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  resided  there  ? 

A.  Over  thirty  years. 

Q.  Have  you  been  connected  with  the  city  government  of  Lowell  ? 

A.  I  have  been  a  member  of  the  City  Council. 


244  APPENDIX. 

Q.  I  would  inquire  of  you  as  to  the  present  state  of  things  in  Lowell,  In 
respect  to  the  free  and  open  sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  sale  of  liquor  was  never  more  free  than  it  is  at  the 
present  time.  I  believe  that  every  dealer  sells  it  in  the  most  open  manner,  as 
much  as  they  please,  and  to  whom  they  please. 

Q.  Is  that  patent  to  every  man  who  lives  there  ?  Is  it  obvious  to  every 
one  that  liquor  is  thus  sold  ? 

A.  1  suppose  so,  sir.  I  do  not  know  of  a  single  place  that  has  been 
closed.  There  have  been  seizures,  and  liquors  carried  away,  but  within  an 
hour  there  would  be  jugs  in  the  saloon  to  supply  the  place  of  the  barrels. 

Q.  How  is  it  as  to  the  habits  of  the  people  in  Lowell,  in  respect  to 
intemperance  ? 

A.  I  think  there  is  a  very  general  want  of  feeling  upon  the  subject, 
although  there  are  some  organizations  that  are  active  still ;  and  the  habits  of 
the  better  people  have  changed  entirely  in  regard  to  furnishing  it  on  festive 
occasions. 

Q.  How  is  it  since  the  prohibitory  liquor  law  was  passed  in  regard  to  the 
use  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  think  if  we  look  back  to  about  the  year  1847 — from  1845  to  1860 — 
we  should  find  a  time  when  there  was  the  best  condition  of  things. 

Q.     State  what  was  the  condition  of  things  then  ? 

A .  There  was  a  universal  feeling  in  the  community  in  regard  to  sustaining 
the  law.  Liquor  was  sold  at  the  time,  but  there  was  a  strong  feeling  in  favor 
of  the  law.  I  think  in  1846  and  1847,  our  principal  liquor-dealers,  our  hotel 
keepers  and  prominent  dealers  were  induced  to  siga  a  pledge  to  give  up  the 
business,  not  from  prosecution,  but  from  other  causes.  Liquor  was  not  used, 
nor  offered  at  parties ;  so  universally  did  the  people  refrain  from  offering  it, 
that  when  it  was  offered  by  any  one  at  a  party  it  was  thought  remarkable. 

Q.     How  is  it  now  ? 

A.  It  is  almost  universally  used,  or  at  least  it  is  now  used  in  a  great  many 
instances  where  it  was  not  used  then.  I  believe  it  is  generally  offered  and 
used  at  parties.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  the  habit  is  universal,  but  I  mean 
that  it  is  used  among  the  better  class  of  our  citizens  who  did  not  use  it  years 
ago. 

Q.  Have  you  been  heretofore  actively  engaged  in  the  temperance 
movement  ? 

A.  I  have  been,  but  am  not  so  much  so  of  later  years.  I  was  up  to  that 
time,  but  for  several  years  back  I  have  not  been  engaged  in  the  cause  so 
much  as  formerly. 

Q.  From  your  own  observation  in  the  matter,  what  has  been  the  cause  of 
this  change  ? 

A .  I  think  there  was  a  great  mistake  made  by  the  temperance  people 
when  this  law  went  into  effect,  in  thinking  that  the  law  was  to  do  the  work. 
There  was  not  the  same  effort  made  by  them  after  that.  They  trusted  to  the 
authorities  to  abate  the  nuisance.  The  temperance  movement  was  not  kept 
up  as  it  had  been  previously.  At  the  present  time,  there  is  a  difference  of 
opinion  about  the  law,  and  a  feeling  that  it  has  not  done  the  work.  For  some 


APPENDIX.  245 

reason  or  other,  the  temperance  people  feel  that  the  law,  as  it  now  is,  is  not 
going  to  do  the  work. 

Q.  Have  you  been  able  to  form  any  opinion  as  to  what  system  of  legisla- 
tion, if  any,  would  be  better  for  Lowell,  than  the  present  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  have  no  system  to  offer.  I  do  not  know  what  is  best.  I 
am  .one  of  those  who  feel  that  generally  too  much  reliance  is  based  upon  the 
law.  I  have  more  faith  in  moral  influences  than  I  have  in  any  law  whatever. 
In  regard  to  a  license  law,  I  have  never  signed  any  petition  in  favor  of  such 
a  law,  or  been  considered  as  an  advocate  of  a  license  law.  I  think,  however, 
from  looking  over  the  whole  matter  and  considering  the  present  condition  of 
things,  that  better  measures  than  those  now  in  force  might  be  adopted.  One 
great  evil  should  be  remedied,  the  quality  of  the  liquor  sold  should  be 
improved,  but  whether  such  a  regulation  could  be  incorporated  in  any  law  or 
not,  I  do  not  know.  I  would  not  license  the  sale  of  liquor  at  a  public  bar.  I 
do  not  hold  to  selling  liquor  by  the  glass,  nor  in  any  other  way  except  for 
medicinal  purposes.  I  am  not  prepared  to  express  an  opinion  as  to  what  law 
will  best  suppress  intemperance.  I  am  only  prepared  to  express  my  feeling, 
that  under  the  present  management  of  the  law,  so  far  as  the  city  of  Lowell  is 
concerned,  it  is  a  failure ;  and  any  person  well  versed  in  the  condition  of 
things  there  will  say  the  same  thing. 

Q.  Are  you  prepared  to  speak  of  the  habits  of  the  middle  class  of  people 
in  Lowell  as  compared  with  their  habits  at  the  former  period  to  which  you 
have  referred  ? 

A.  I  think  there  has  been  a  great  change.  I  think  that  at  the  present 
time  one  of  the  greatest  evils  among  us,  is  the  use  of  beer  and  ale  and  porter. 
The  use  of  such  liquors  is  now  almost  universal.  A  very  large  majority  of 
the  laboring  people  use  ale  or  beer  and  a  great  many  of  them  to  excess. 
They  also  use  other  liquors,  but  I  know  that  an  immense  quantity  of  ale  and 
beer  is  sold.  I  think  that  the  habits  of  the  laboring  people  in  this  respect 
have  changed  very  materially. 

Q.  Does  the  enforcement  of  this  law,  by  all  the  appliances  known  for  the 
enforcement  of  law,  secure  the  co-operation  of  the  moral  portion  of  the  com- 
munity in  the  cause  ? 

A.  I  think  there  is  a  general  lack  of  confidence  in  the  law,  and  in  various 
ways,  a  lack  of  co-operation.  Men  who  consider  themselves  respectable,  and 
even  men  who  consider  themselves  temperance  men,  let  their  houses  for  the 
sale  of  liquor. 

Q.  If  it  were  left  to  the  several  towns  and  cities  to  say  whether  they 
would  have  a  prohibitory  law,  or  would  permit  the  sale  of  liquor  under  such 
restrictions  as  they  might  think  best  to  adopt, — under  which  system  do  you 
think  that  the  cause  of  temperance,  by  the  aid  of  its  friends,  would  be  best 
promoted  ? 

A.  Not  knowing  what  plan  would  be  submitted,  I  am  hardly  able  to 
answer. 

Q.  Take  the  plan  suggested  by  yourself,  of  prohibiting  open  bars,  not 
permitting  hotel  keepers  to  furnish  liquor  except  to  guests,  but  permitting 
retail  sellers  to  furnish  it  to  families  for  culinary  and  medicinal  purposes. 


246  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  should  think  such  a  one  would  be  better  than  the  present  condition 
of  things. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Are  you  not  aware  that  at  the  period  to  which 
you  referred — 1845-7 — a  large  number  of  cases  against  the  principal  liquor- 
dealers  of  Lowell,  had  accumulated  in  the  courts,  and  that  it  was  in  conse- 
quence of  a  promise  on  the  part  of  those  dealers  to  leave  the  business,  that 
the  cases  were  not  forced  to  a  conclusion,  but  that  after  a  lapse  of  a  few 
months,  their  cases  having  been  disposed  of,  they  returned  to  the  business  ? 

A.  I  am  not  aware  of  that,  if  it  be  a  fact ;  and  I  was  the  principal  party 
who  negotiated  with  them  to  leave  off. 

Q.    What  were  the  terms  ? 

A .     That  they  should  give  up  the  business. 

Q.  Were  not  the  cases  then  pending,  the  principal  inducement  with  them 
to  leave  off  the  sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.    I  am  not  aware  of  that;  it  may  have  been  so. 

Q.  I  was  aware  of  the  fact.  I  was  a  resident  of  Lowell  at  the  time.  You 
testify  that  it  may  have  'been  so.  Under  this  persuasive,  they  signed  an 
agreement  to  give  up  the  business,  which  agreement  they  broke  as  soon  as 
those  cases  were  disposed  of.  The  dealers  then  believed  that  they  were  to 
be  driven  from  the  business,  and  the  authorities  could  have  easily  done  so  at 
that  time,  but  were  not  disposed  to.  The  pending  cases  were  compromised, 
and  they  agreed  to  leave  the  business.  I  ask  you  if  you  remember  that  state 
of  things  ? 

A.  I  do  not.  I  remember  very  distinctly  of  obtaining  the  names  of  those 
parties,  and  they  may  have  been  influenced  by  an  expectation  that  any 
prosecutions  against  them  would  be  withdrawn.  I  think  you  are  mistaken 
in  the  time  of  the  accumulation  of  cases. 

Q.  But  I  understand  you  to  say  that  you  cannot  testify  that  it  was  not 
under  the  force  of  the  accumulated  cases  that  they  were  induced  to  sign  the 
agreement  ? 

A.  I  cannot  testify  to  that.  My  impression  is  that  it  was  not,  but  I 
cannot  speak  positively,  not  having  sufficiently  prepared  myself  with  the 
facts  and  dates. 

Q.  You  expressed  some  censure  upon  the  temperance  men  for  not  contin- 
uing their  moral  efforts  for  the  suppression  of  intemperance.  Were  you  not 
among  the  temperance  men  ?  Why  do  you  not  continue  your  efforts  in  that 
way? 

A.  Previous  to  the  time  that  I  left  off  working  I  had  been.in  a  prominent 
position.  I  had  held  the  office  of  president  of  the  temperance  society  for 
several  years.  I  had  made  great  sacrifices  for  the  cause.  I  devoted  my 
money,  my  time  and  my  influence  to  promote  the  cause.  I  left  it  then  in 
other  hands,  and  I  have  not  had  an  office  in  a  temperance  society  since. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  a  large  number  of  temperance  men  who  had  returned  to 
the  use  of  liquor ;  are  you  one  of  them  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  do  not  use  it  as  a  beverage.  I  use  it  as  prescribed,  but  not 
habitually.  I  have  lived  in  Lowell  over  thirty  years,  and  during  that  time 
have  never  bought  or  paid  for  five  glasses  of  liquor  for  myself  or  for  anybody 
else. 


APPENDIX.  247 

A.  At  any  period,  to  your  knowledge,  has  the  city  government  of  Lowell 
used  all  the  power  at  its  command  to  prevent  the  sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.    I  should  think  they  had. 

Q.     Will  you  say  when  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  as  I  can  specify  any  particular  year.  I  know  that 
resolutions  have  been  passed  by  the  Board  of  Aldermen,  and  the  City  Marshal 
has  been  directed  to  enforce  the  law.  I  have  conversed  with  them  about  it, 
and  found  this  state  of  things :  In  one  instance  the  City  Marshal  was 
instructed  to  enforce  the  liquor-law,  but,  in  doing  so,  he  must  not  go  into  any 
place  to  obtain  evidence.  -The  marshal  said  that  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten 
those  men  whom  you  see  go  into  a  saloon  and  come  out  again  wiping  their 
lips,  will,  when  summoned  into  court  as  witnesses,  say  that  they  drank  soda 
water  or  something  of  that  kind.  You  cannot  convict  on  such  testimony. 

Q.    Why  do  you  suppose  the  marshal  was  not  allowed  to  go  in  ? 

A.    I  suppose  there  was  objection  to  that  mode  of  acquiring  evidence. 

Q.     Do  you  feel  that  there  was  really  any  intention  to  execute  the  law  ? 

A.     Some  years  there  has  been  and  other  years  there  has  not  been. 

Q.  Do  you  think  such  a  business  as  the  liquor  traffic  can  be  broken  up  in 
a  moment,  even  with  the  best  of  intentions  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  ever  was  such  a  continuous  effort, — such  a  continu- 
ous purpose — on  the  part  of  the  city  government  of  Lowell,  as  would  amount 
to  a  fright  to  the  liquor-sellers,  or  raise  any  serious  apprehension  in  respect  to 
their  business  ? 

A.    Perhaps  not. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  liquor-sellers  in  1845,  '46  and  '47,  giving  up  their  busi- 
ness, but  state  that  you  are  not  aware  that  it  was  done  under  the  pressure  of 
pending  cases  ;  do  you  know  what  sort  of  a  law  was  in  operation  then  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  that  I  can  state,  precisely,  what  sort  of  a  law  it  was. 

Q.  It  was  the  old  license  law ;  but  are  you  aware  that  the  license  law  was 
administered  as  a  strictly  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.    There  were  no  licenses  then. 

Q.  So  far  then  as  the  government  was  concerned,  it  was  strictly  prohibi- 
tory ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     But  it  was  not  enforced  strictly  as  a  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.     Various  difficulties  have  been  in  the  way  of  enforcing  the  law. 

Q,  Then  that  good  state  of  things  that  you  referred  to,  as  in  contrast  with 
the  existing  state  of  things,  was  under  a  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  The  prohibitory  law  had  become  a  dead  letter,  to  some  extent.  The 
difficulty  which  existed  then,  (and  exists  now,)  was  in  obtaining  convictions. 

Q.  It  was  under  a  license  law  which  gave  no  licenses,  but  was  admin- 
istered as  a  prohibitory  law,  and  so  far  as  the  law  was  concerned,  was 
prohibitory,  that  that  good  state  of  things  existed.  Was  that  not  the  fact  ? 

A.    I  suppose  that  is  a  well-known  fact. 

Q.  Is  it  not  true  that  there  have  been  temperance  efforts  by  associations, 
by  public  meetings,  and  the  like,  in  Lowell,  all  along  through  these  last  fifteen 
or  twenty  years  ? 


248  APPENDIX. 

A.     Occasionally  they  were,  but  not  as  formerly. 

Q.     How  often  do  you  think  that  public  meetings  were  formerly  held  ? 

A.     They  were  always  held  once  per  week,  and  sometimes  oftener. 

Q.     You  would  not  say  always  ? 

A.  Nearly  always.  We  had  meetings  in  the  public  hall  on  Sunday 
evenings,  and  the  best  lecturers  in  the  county  gave  addresses. 

Q.     During  what  portion  of  the  year  ? 

A.  It  may  be  that  during  some  of  the  summer  months  there  were  no 
meetings,  but  there  were  more  than  half  the  year. 

Q.     Are  you  not  aware  that  things  look  bright  in  the  distance  ? 

A .     Sometimes  they  do  ;  sometimes  they  look  otherwise. 

Q,  If  you  and  the  friends  of  temperance  would  not  have  open  bars  in 
in  Lowell,  why  have  you  not  closed  the  bars  there  ?' 

A.     Do  you  ask  me  why  /  have  not  closed  the  bars  ? 

Q.  I  ask  why  the  authorities,  or  the  citizens  and  the  authorities,  do  not 
close  the  open  bars,  if  such  is  their  wish  ? 

A.     They  cannot  do  it. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  they  cannot  do  it  ? 

A.  I  do  think  that  they  cannot  do  it  with  public  opinion  as  it  is  at 
present. 

Q.     Of  what  opinion  do  you  now  speak  ? 

A.     I  speak  of  the  opinion  of  the  men  of  influence  in  Lowell. 

Q.     Of  the  men  who  constitute  the  government  of  the  city  ? 

A.    Yes. 

Q.     They  do  not  want  to  close  the  bars  ? 

A.     They  have  no  faith  in  the  law. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  officials  of  Lowell  do  not  want  to  close 
the  open  bars  ? 

A.    I  do  not  think  that  they  do. 

Q.     If  the  men  of  influence  want  to  do  it,  why  are  they  not  in  office  ? 

A.  You  must  attend  the  public  meetings  to  see.  Men  get  into  office  by 
"wire-pulling,"  &c. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  as  saying  that  men  of  influence  in  Lowell  wish  to 
close  the  open  bars  ? 

A.  1  have  no  doubt  but  that  you  could  get  an  almost  unanimous  vote  to 
have  them  closed. 

Q.     Then  why  is  not  the  law  executed  in  Lowell  ? 

A .     Why  is  it  not  executed  in  Boston  ? 

Q.  Public  opinion,  they  tell  us,  is  against  it — that  the  majority  is  in  favor 
of  open  bars  ;  but  you  say  that  they  do  not  think  so  in  Lowell  ? 

A.  My  impression  is  that  there  would  be  a  good  vote  in  favor  of  the 
measure. 

Q.  Is  it  a  matter  of  record  that  these  influential  citizens  want  the  State 
Police  to  visit  Lowell  ? 

A.    I  have  never  heard  any  opposition  expressed. 

Q.     They  are  welcome  there  ? 

A.     They  are,  so  far  as  I  know. 

Q.     Do  they  grieve  over  their  non-success  ? 


APPENDIX.  249 

A.  That  is  a  question  you  can  as  well  answer  as  myself.  I  am  not  in  a 
position  to  know  the  private  feelings  of  everybody. 

Q.  Your  want  of  confidence  in  the  law  upon  this  subject,  I  understand,  is  not 
confined  to  this  law  in  particular.  You  place  more  faith  in  other  influences 
than  the  law,  do  you  not  ? 

A.  I  would  not  vote  for  abolishing  all  law  on  the  subject,  but  I  would 
have  such  a  law  as  the  community  would  sustain,  or  else  I  would  not  think 
much  of  the  law. 

Q.     What  particular  object  is  there  in  having  a  law  to  continue  an  existing 
evil,  if  public  opinion  will  not  sustain  it  ? 
A.     I  do  not  understand  your  question. 
Q.     I  understand  you  to  regard  the  open  traffic  as  an  evil  ? 
A.     I  do. 

Q.  If  public  opinion  demands  an  open  traffic,  do  you  think  it  wise  to 
sanction  that  open  traffic  by  law  ? 

A.     I  do  not  quite  understand  your  question  now. 

Q.  It  seems  to  be  assumed  here  that  public  opinion  will  not  tolerate  the 
suppression  of  the  open  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors.  My  question  is,  What 
good  is  to  be  gained  by  a  law  sanctioning  the  traffic  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  public  opinion  of  Lowell  would  sanction  the  suppres- 
sion if  it  could  be  done. 

Q.    If  the  existing  law  cannot  suppress  it,  how  can  a  license  law  ? 
A.    I  do  not  think  that  any  law  can  entirely  suppress  the  sale.    I  think, 
however,  it  might  be  regulated. 

Q.  How  does  throwing  the  arm  of  the  law  around  a  man  selling  liquor  by 
the  glass,  regulate  the  sale  ? 

A.  I  am  not  prepared  to  state  any  theory  of  license,  having  been  called 
here  unexpectedly. 

Q.  But  you  have  said  that  you  would  not  sell  by  the  glass  ? 
A.  I  have.  My  theory  about  licenses  would  be  something  like  this: 
Liquor  should  never  be  sold  as  an  article  of  traffic  alone.  Its  sale  might  be 
permitted  to  guests  at  hotels,  and  for  medicinal  and  mechanical  purposes ;  but 
under  extreme  restrictions  as  to  whom  it  was  sold.  I  would  make  the  law  so 
strict  that  a  license  would  not  be  worth  a  great  deal  when  granted. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  it  makes  any  difference  who  sells  a  glass  of  brandy, 
in  the  effect  that  that  glass  of  brandy  will  produce  ? 

A.  It  makes  some  difference  who  sells  it.  A  respectable,  conscientious 
man  would  not  sell  it  wrongly ;  he  would  only  sell  it  where  it  would  do  no 
harm. 

Q.     Do  you  not  think  that  it  always  does  harm  when  used  as  a  beverage  ? 
A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Is  its  sale  as  a  medicine  not  provided  for  under  the  existing  law  ? 
A.     Yes,  sir.    I  would  not  ask  a  license  law,  because  I  could  not  fully 
sanction  it,  but  only  as  a  choice  of  evils. 

TESTIMONY  OF  GENERAL  ISAAC  S.  BUKRELL. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)    Where  do  you  reside  ? 
A.    In  the  city  of  Roxbury. 
32 


250  APPENDIX. 

Q.    Have  you  been  connected  with  tho  city  government  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    In  what  capacity  ? 

A.    More  recently  I  was  City  Marshal. 

Q.     How  long  were  you  City  Marshal  ? 

A.     About  two  years. 

Q.    In  what  capacity  before  that  ? 

A .     I  have  been  in  both  branches  of  the  city  government. 

Q.  What  is  your  observation  in  your  official  position  at  the  present  time  as 
to  the  fact  whether  liquor  is  sold  or  drank  freely  in  Roxbury  ? 

A.    I  am  not  the  City  Marshal  at  the  present  time. 

Q.    Wh'at  was  it  while  you  were  ? 

A.  During  the  last  summer  there  were  no  liquors  sold  openly  at  bars,  but 
liquor  is  sold  by  the  bottle,  I  suppose,  as  I  see  it  in  the  stores  marked  for  sale. 
I  am  told  that  there  are  no  open  bars  nor  places  where  liquor  is  sold  by  the 
glass  openly. 

Q.    Is  it  sold  secretly  ? 

A.  I  presume  it  is.  I  have  no  doubt  but  liquor  is  sold.  At  the  time  I 
was  appointed  City  Marshal,  which  was  in  the  winter  of  1864,  liquor  was  sold 
in  a  large  number  of  places.  Immediately  after  the  State  Constabulary  was 
instituted  they  came  out  to  Roxbury,  and  some  one  hundred  complaints  were 
made  and  parties  were  brought  into  court ;  and  they  have  been  prosecuted 
continually  ever  since. 

Q.    What  has  been  the  effect  as  to  the  diminishing  of  intoxication  or  sale  ? 

A.  I  cannot  give  a  very  correct  account  according  to  any  statistics;  it 
would  have  to  be  a  matter  of  opinion. 

Q.     Your  opinion  is  what  I  ask  for. 

A.  My  opinion  from  my  own  observation  and  that  of  the  officers,  is 
that  drunkenness  had  not  decreased.  Our  commitals  are  about  the  same. 

Q.     Where  is  this  liquor  obtained  ?     Where  is  it  kept  usually  ? 

A.  Well,  it  is  presumed  to  be  sold  in  almost  every  tenement  house. 
There  are  no  bars.  The  officers  have  been  instructed  to  go  into  these  places, 
but  they  find  no  bars ;  but  still  there  are  about  the  same  number  of  drunkards 
presenting  themselves,  and  it  is  presumed  that  they  get  their  liquor  there,  as 
they  are  seen  to  come  out  drunk. 

Q.     How  extensive  are  these  tenement  houses  in  Roxbury  ? 

A.  We  have  a  large  manufacturing  population,  and  they  inhabit  the  two 
lower  wards,  principally. 

Q.  Have  any  efforts  been  made  there,  heretofore  or  at  the  present  time, 
to  decrease  the  amount  of  liquor  sold.  Has  the  number  of  arrests  increased 
or  diminished,  as  coming  within  your  observation  as  City  Marshal  ? 

A.  My  immediate  predecessor  made  a  very  strenuous  effort  to  close  up  all 
classes  of  places  where  liquor  was  sold,  and  followed  it  up,  making  it  a  spec- 
iality in  business ;  but  some  two  or  three  years  after  he  was  appointed  as  City 
Marshal  he  gave  it  up,  having  changed  his  ideas,  and  did  not  prosecute  in  all 
cases.  When  I  came  into  office,  the  State  Constabulary  came  to  me  and  we 
issued  warrants  and  gave  such  information  as  was  desired,  so  far  as  we  were 
in  possession  of  it. 


APPENDIX.  251 

I Q.  Did  you  have  any  opportunity  to  observe  the  operation  of  this  Maine 
Law,  in  the  State  of  Maine,  soon  after  it  was  enacted  ? 

A.    I  did,  sir,  in  the  city  of  Portland. 

Q.    Who  was  mayor  at  that  time  ? 

A.  It  was  at  the  time  that  Gen.  Neal  Dow  was  mayor.  I  think  it  was  his 
first  year ;  at  any  rate  it  was  at  the  time  when  it  was  supposed,  (and  I  presume 
correctly,)  that  there  was  none  sold  openly.  In  fact,  I  saw  none  sold  any  way. 
The  occasion  of  my  being  there,  was  that  a  military  company  of  which  I 
was  an  officer,  made  a  visit  to  Portland,  and  we  found  that  there  was  a  great 
deal  of  drunkenness  there  on  that  occasion,  and  that  it  was  with  difficulty 
that  men  could  be  kept  sober  who  were  ordinarily  temperance  men,  from  the 
fact  that  they  could  go  into  some  private  place  out  of  sight,  or  out  of  the  way 
of  their  friends,  and  would  get  intoxicated.  It  was  set  on  the  tables  in  vinegar 
cruets  and  all  such  arrangements. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  in  regard  to  the  ability  of  police  officers,  under 
the  present  system  of  law,  to  prevent  the  evil  of  intemperance  ? 

A.    I  have  no  doubt  but  that  all  public  sales  could  be  prohibited. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  effect  of  that  as  a  matter  of  fact  in  your  opinion,  as 
far  as  your  observation  extends,  as  to  the  secret  obtaining  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  can  only  give  my  opinion  that,  so  far  as  my  experience  for  the  past 
two  years  extends,  it  has  not  diminished  drunkenness;  on  the  contrary,  it 
seems  to  me  that  a  great  many  more  females  are  getting  into  the  habit  of 
drinking  than  heretofore. 

Q.     Any  observations  in  regard  to  children  ? 

A.  Some  of  the  older  children,  that  is,  twelve  or  fourteen  years  of  age.  I 
do  not  know  as  it  affects  children  so  much  as  females,  generally  wives  and 
older  daughters. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EDWARD  L.  PIERCE. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  You  are  District  Attorney  for  the  South-Eastern 
District  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    You  were  formerly  collector  of  United  States  Internal  Revenue  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;  in  the  Third  District. 

Q.  Some  questions  have  been  asked  in  relation  to  the  inferences  to  be 
drawn  in  reference  to  the  licenses  now  issued  by  the  United  States'  authorities, 
and  those  issued  two  or  three  years  ago.  Has  the  matter  ever  been  the  subject 
of  attention  on  your  part  ? 

A.     The  number  of  licenses  issued  is  diminished. 

Q.     Can  you  state  the  reason  why  ? 

A.  It  was  diminished  from  this  circumstance:  that  parties  were  averse 
to  taking  out  licenses  from  the  fear  that  they  would  be  used  as  evidence 
against  them  in  the  criminal  courts  when  they  were  on  trial  for  the  sale  of 
liquor,  and  for  that  reason  they  declined  to  take  them.  The  United  States 
officers — the  assessors  and  collectors — would  pursue  a  person  not  taking  a 
license,  where  it  was  a  clear  and  plain  case  of  a  public  bar ;  but  in  that  large 
class  of  cases,  where  the  business  retired  to  a  more  private  sale,  and  the 


252  APPENDIX. 

evidence  was  more  difficult  to  obtain — as  in  most  of  the  trials  in  Norfolk 
County  it  was — the  United  States  officers  would  not  think  it  would  pay  to 
pursue  them ;  therefore  a  party  would  not  procure  a  license.  These  figures 
do  not  show  at  all  a  decrease  in  sales. 

Q.  When  they  were  first  issued,  was  it  the  theory  that  they  would  protect 
the  dealers  against  the  State  law  ? 

A.     There  was  that  theory  among  the  sellers. 

Q.     There  has  been  some  decision  on  that  subject  ? 

A.  That  has  been  decided  at  the  last  term  of  the  United  States  Court,  at 
Washington.  A  year  ago,  and  more  recently,  there  has  been  a  supplementary 
decision  to  that. 

Q.  Have  you  any  means  of  forming  an  opinion  as  to  the  value  of  the  pro- 
hibitory law  in  reducing  the  amount  of  drunkenness  from  your  observation  as 
an  officer  and  as  a  citizen  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  that,  contrary  to  the  impression  of  others,  intemperance 
has  greatly  decreased.  I  have  also  no  doubt  that  it  has  little  or  no  connection 
with  any  law.  I  think  it  is  due  to  this  :  there  is  a  higher  intellectual  tone  of  life  ; 
that  is,  our  people  have  become  more  cultivated  under  the  influence  of  better 
schools  and  higher  civilization.  The  standard  of  social  respectability  is  raised, 
and  people  have  refrained  from  intemperance  without  any  reference  to  any 
law.  I  think  modern  preaching  leads  to  it.  The  preaching  of  our  time  puts 
religion  upon  the  basis  of  practical  life  and  conduct.  I  think  also  that  the 
fact  that  there  is  an  abundance  of  labor  for  laboring  people  more  than  there 
used  to  be,  also  conduces  to  the  same  end. 

Q.    Are  there  better  wages  ? 

A.  Not  so  much  that  as  the  abundance  of  labor.  No  man  need  to  be  idle ; 
and  idleness  is  provocative  of  the  passions.  I  think  that  the  abundance  of 
water  and  ice  in  the  cities,  tend  also  to  the  same  end.  My  experience  is 
more  with  professional  men  and  farmers.  I  know  that  intemperance  has 
decreased  largely  among  this  class ;  and  I  think  I  know  that  that  is  irrespective 
of  any  law.  The  tendency  to  virtue  is  prompted,  not  so  much  by  removing 
the  temptation,  as  by  increasing  the  moral  power  within. 

Q.     How  is  it  as  to  the  number  of  persons  among  this  class  who  drink  ? 

A .  I  believe  that  our  town  (Milton)  is  one  of  twelve  towns  in  the  Com- 
monwealth that  have  no  town  agent ;  but  I  do  not  think  that  throughout  the 
community  generally  there  is  one  man  in  ten,  if  there  is  one  man  in  twenty, 
that  under  all  circumstances,  abstains  from  some  use  of  liquor.  It  is  impos- 
sible to  state  the  number  of  men  in  my  county ;  there  are  very  few  that 
totally  abstain  under  all  circumstances. 

Q.  Is  it  a  fact  that  this  class  of  persons  of  whom  you  speak,  do  in  fact  use 
these  liquors,  yet  drunkenness  is  diminished  ? 

A.     That  is  a  fact  as  my  observation  determines. 

Q.  What  do  you  find  to  be  the  effect  produced  by  the  operation  of  that 
law  when  carried  into  actual  execution  upon  liquor-dealers  in  your  district  ? 
Does  it  prevent  the  sale,  or  otherwise ;  or  what  effect  does  it  produce  ? 

A.  My  district  covers  Norfolk  and  Plymouth  Counties,  and  I  think  that 
Plymouth  County  is,  of  all  others,  most  favorable  to  the  execution  of  the 
law  ;  Norfolk  County  is  an  average  county.  In  Plymouth  County  a  convic- 


APPENDIX.  253 

tion  for  the  sale  of  spiritous  liquors  can  always  be  procured  where  the  evi- 
dence is  sufficient.  In  Norfolk  County  it  can  ordinarily.  We  are  liable  to 
have  out  of  twenty-four  jurors,  or  out  of  each  jury,  and  the  half-dozen  super- 
numeraries, two  or  three  who  are  disposed  to  take  the  law  into  their  own 
hands.  Practically,  in  both  counties,  proper  proof  of  the  sale  of  spirituous 
liquors  will  insure  conviction.  I  remember  to  have  tried  six  cases  in  one  day, 
(which  is  about  all  that  can  be  tried,)  and  though  we  had  a  hard  fight 
of  it,  yet  we  carried  each  case.  In  the  case  of  beer  and  cider,  public 
sentiment  is  entirely  against  it. 

Q.     In  what  county  ? 

A.  It  is  pretty  much'  so  in  both  of  them.  It  is  impossible  unless  you  can 
introduce  into  the  case  the  fact  that  the  place  is  a  great  nuisance.  If  I  can 
show  that  a  great  many  men  in  a  state  of  drunkenness  are  coming  away  from 
these  places,  or  if  there"  has  been  somebody  assaulted,  I  can  get  a  conviction, 
but  otherwise  not.  In  one  case  in  Plymouth,  a  few  weeks  ago,  it  was  proved 
perfectly  clear  that  beer  had  been  sold.  Men  have  gone  into  the  business  of 
making  beer,  somewhat.  It  is  very  easy  to  do  it ;  and  when  they  are  prose- 
cuted, they  will  always  produce  a  row  of  witnesses  who  will  decide  that  it  is 
not  intoxicating,  but  that  it  will  make  a  person  sick  before  they  have  a  chance 
to  get  intoxicated.  The  constables  do  not  wish  to  try  it,  and  there  is  no  rea- 
son for  their  getting  a  chemist,  and  so  these  persons  bring  in  their  witnesses 
to  testify  that  the  beer  will  make  a  person  sick  before  it  intoxicates  them.  In 
this  case  which  I  speak  of,  the  man  who  made  the  beer  was  put  upon  the 
stand,  being  the  employee  of  the  person  prosecuted,  and  he  testified  that 
persons  came  into  the  place  and  drank,  and  did  not  get  intoxicated.  I  proved 
half  a  dozen  cases  of  drunkenness,  and  that  is  enough  in  any  such  prosecu- 
tion. From  that  case  and  others,  I  am  certain  of  this  :  that  juries  as  they 
run  everywhere  in  the  Commonwealth  are  against  the  enforcement  of  the  law 
in  relation  to  the  sale  of  beer  and  cider.  Perhaps  the  Committee  may  not  be 
aware  of  the  little  technical  distinction  that  we  have.  We  prosecute  under  the 
86th  chapter  for  nuisances,  and  under  the  S7th  for  common  sellers.  There  is  a 
provision  in  the  Common  Seller  Act  that  beer  and  ale  are  not  intoxicating, 
and  these  persons  will  say  strong  beer,  and  hop  beer,  and  it  is  difficult  to 
make  any  such  distinction,  as  the  beer  is  commonly  made  from  hops.  As  to 
the  other  matter  of  the  sale  of  whiskey,  and  such  like  liquors,  with  the 
exception  of  two  or  three  men  who  get  on  the  jury  in  Norfolk  County 
occasionally,  the  juries  will  convict  if  the  case  is  a  clear  one.  The  result 
is  that  in  some  places  there  will  apparently  be  a  stop  put  to  the  sale.  Now  in 
the  town  of  Dorchester,  I  presume  there  have  some  persons  gone  out  of  the 
business,  and  I  should  say  that  less  liquor  was  sold  there ;  but  that  is  a  town 
only  a  little  distance  from  Boston,  and  it  requires  only  a  little  time  and  twelve 
and  one-half  cents  to  come  into  Boston  and  get  liquor,  if  a  person  wants  it. 
In  Abington,  and  other  towns  further  out,  the  number  of  cases  brought  into 
court  is  about  the  same.  These  cases  seem  hopeless.  I  do  not  think  they 
will  ever  be  any  less.  I  had  a  man  convicted  and  sent  to  jail,  but  after  he 
was  released  he  was  found  to  be  selling  again,  and  in  a  few  weeks  he  was  con- 
ricted  a  second  time.  I  do  not  know  how  it  may  be  in  Roxbury  as  regards 


254  APPENDIX. 

that  matter.    I  do  not  know  of  any  open  bar,  but  I  think  there  is  one ;  but 
that  has  been  prosecuted  recently. 

TESTIMONY  OF  ADDISOX  GAGE. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     Do  you  belong  to  the  firm  of  Gage  &  Co,  ? 

A.    The  firm  is  now  Addison  Gage  &  Co. 

Q,     Your  home  is  in  West  Cambridge  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Have  you  signed  one  of  the  petitions  in  reference  to  a  license  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    You  are  a  large  employer  of  men  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir, 

Q.    And  have  been  many  years  in  active  business  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  state  what  conclusion  you  have  arrived  at  as  an  employer  of 
other  men,  and  as  a  man  of  business,  in  reference  to  the  operation  of  the 
prohibitory  liquor  laws  ? 

A.  I  signed  a  petition  for  a  license  law,  not  because  I  wanted  liquor  sold, 
as  some  people  seem  to  think  there  will  be  a  free  sale  under  a  license  law. 
My  idea  is  to  restrain  the  sale,  as  I  do  not  think  it  can  be  prohibited.  Taking 
the  large  towns  and  cities,  and,  in  fact,  our  little  city,  I  do  not  think  it  can  be 
enforced.  If  it  could  be  all  banished  in  a  day  I  do  not  believe  it  would  be  a 
good  thing.  I  do  not  believe  in  such  sudden  revolutions.  I  am  in  favor  of 
temperance.  I  believe  that  liquor,  in  most  all  cases,  does  a  great  deal  more 
harm  than  good ;  and  if  I  had  believed  that  this  was  going  to  make  a  free  use 
of  liquor  I  should  be  opposed  to  it.  I  make  it  a  rule  in  my  business  not  to 
employ  any  man  that  is  in  the  habit  of  getting  intoxicated,  particularly  if  he 
is  a  man  to  whom  any  particular  work  is  to  be  intrusted.  If  a  man  applies 
to  me,  I  ask  him  if  he  is  in  the  habit  of  drinking  liquor  daily.  My  experience 
has  been  that  there  is  a  less  amount  of  liquor  drank  now  than  there  used  to  be 
formerly.  Twenty-five  years  ago  my  business  called  me  to  most  of  the  drink- 
ing saloons  with  ice.  I  had  to  collect  my  own  bills,  and  the  best  time  of  day 
was  generally  from  12  to  1  o'clock.  In  the  forty  years  that  I  have  lived  in 
Boston  I  do  not  think  that  I  have  drank  forty  glasses  of  ardent  spirits.  But  I 
was  surprised  to  find  at  these  places  so  many  men  at  that  time  of  day.  I 
would  see  such  a  class  of  men  there  daily,  and  I  have  had  a  curiosity  to  watch 
the  progress  of  those  men ;  and  I  must  say  that  a  very  large  number  of  those 
persons  whom  I  used  to  see  at  these  places,  at  that  time,  have  since  become 
bankrupt.  And  these  were  men  who,  at  that  time,  were  men  of  property  and 
means.  And  my  opinion  is,  that  if  a  man's  habits  are  such  that  he  must  take  a 
glass  of  liquor  daily,  that  sooner  or  latef  it  will  affect  his  judgment  and  tend 
to  ruin  him. 

Q.  You  say  that,  practically,  you  are  in  favor  of  reducing  the  sale  of 
liquor  to  its  minimum  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  should  be  willing  to  reduce  it  to  the  least  amount  that  it 
can  possibly  be  brought  to. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  regard  it  as  desirable  to  abolish  entirely 
the  open  places  for  the  sale  of  liquor  as  a  beverage  ? 


APPENDIX.  255 

A.  Yes,  sir;  if  it  could  be  done.  My  idea  is  to  entirely  prohibit  the  sale 
of  liquor ;  but  I  think,  even  if  it  could  be  done  in  a  day,  it  might  not  be  policy. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  would  be  the  expediency  of  utterly  breaking  down 
the  public  sale  and  restraining  the  traffic,  blotting  out  the  appetite  of  men, 
and  growing  a  generation  free  from  the  use  of  liquor  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  I  should  think  it  was  a  very  good  policy ;  but  this  law  has  been  upon 
the  statute  book  for  some  time  and  the  effect  of  it  has  not  been  as  yet  anything 
like  what  was  expected  of  it. 

Q.     You  are  a  citizen  of  Boston,  .are  you  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  fallen  into  the  mistake  of  supposing  that -the  City  of 
Boston  ever  meant  to  execute  the  law  ?  Did  you  ever  believe  for  one  twenty- 
four  hours  that  Boston  meant  to  execute  the  law  ? 

A.  That  is  a  question  that  I  do  not  know  that  I  can  answer.  The  law  has 
been  in  operation,  and  I  suppose  that  if  they  wanted  to  execute  it  they  could. 

Q.  As  a  citizen  of  Boston  and  acquainted  with  the  various  classes  of 
people,  did  you  ever  think  that  the  authorities  of  Boston  had  set  themselves 
earnestly  at  work  to  carry  out  this  law  ?  Were  you  pretty  clear  in  that 
opinion  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  my  opinion  is  that  if  the  voters  of  Boston  were  to  decide 
the  question,  they  would  vote  against  the  prohibitory  law.  But  probably  the 
officers  could  not  carry  out  the  law,  and  considered  it  the  sentiment  of  the 
majority  of  the  citizens  that  it  ^ught  not  to  be  carried  out. 

Q.  Have  you  any  great  confidence  that  the  license  law  would  better  the 
state  of  things  ? 

A .  I  have  such  confidence  that  I  would  like  to  see  it  tried,  if  the  law 
could  be  according  to  my  ideas.  I  do  not  know  whether  it  would  be  practi- 
cable to  make  exactly  such  a  law  as  I  should  desire. 

Q.     What  are  your  ideas  ? 

A,  That  every  town  should  decide  for  itself  whether  they  would  have  the 
law  or  not. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  if  Cambridge  should  decide  to  have  a  license  law, 
and  if  Boston  should  not  have  a  license  law,  it  would  be  effective  in 
Cambridge  ? 

A.  I  think  it  would.  The  people  in  Cambridge  who  drink,  would  come 
here  and  get  it  anyway  ;  and  I  think  that  the  law  would  prevent  the  sale  at 
public  bars. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  it  can  be  done  ? 

A.    I  have  very  much  doubt  whether  it  can  be  done  at  present  in  Boston. 

Q.     If  you  could  frame  a  license  law  would  you  attempt,  it  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  do  not  think  I  would  at  the  present  time,  because  I  think 
there  would  be  any  number  of  places  in  these  back  alleys  and  in  cellars, 
where  the  liquor  would  be  sold ;  and  the  interest  is  so  large  and  the  public 
sentiment  is  so  strong  in  favor  of  selling,  that  I  think  it  would  be  almost 
impossible  to  prevent  the  sale ;  but  I  would  not  have  a  public  bar  unless  it 
were  entirely  open.  I  would  not  have  the  bars  concealed,  and  the  green  cur- 
tains up  at  the  windows,  but  I  would  have  the  sale  ivhere  everybody  could  see. 

Q.    Would  you  have  a  man  put  down  his  green  curtains  ? 


256  APPENDIX. 

A.  Yes,  sir,  I  would.  I  believe  there  are  a  dozen  glasses  of  liquor  drunk 
from  it  in  Boston  where  there  would  not  be  more  than  one  otherwise  ;  because 
men  can  go  in  out  of  sight  and  get  their  liquor  and  drink  it. 

Q.    Do  you  mean  to  say  that  you  would  make  all  drinking  out  of  sight  ? 

A.     I  would  have  it  in  sight. 

Q.     You  would  then  only  legalize  what  the  public  saw  ? 

A.    If  a  man  wanted  liquor  at  the  hotel  I  would  let  him  have  it. 

Q.  You  would  shame  the  people  out  of  drinking  by  keeping  it  in  the 
public  eye  ? 

A.  If  men  did  not  want  to  drink  in  these  places  they  would  not  want  the 
liquor  so  much. 

Q.  A  man  might  be  licensed  to  sell  under  a  license  law,  but  his  customer 
might  be  a  man  who  wanted  to  go  behind  the  green  curtain  ? 

A.  There  are  a  great  many  who  would  be  willing  td  drink  right  in  public 
sight,  but  most  men  would  prefer  to  get  out  of  the  way  of  the  public  eye. 

Q.  Here  is  a  practical  problem.  We  will  suppose  that,  under  the  view  of 
these  spectators,  persons  are  licensed  to  sell  liquor,  and  are  protected  by  the 
law.  How  would  it  be  any  easier  to  suppress  the  others  ?  How  does  the  pro- 
tection of  the  law  that  is  thrown  about  one-half,  operate  in  any  way  against 
the  other  ? 

A.  If  there  are  a  hundred  men  who  are  my  enemies,  and  I  can  go  to 
work  and  make  fifty  of  them  my  friends,  I  think  I  should  prefer  to  do  that 
rather  than  to  meet  the  whole  number  as  enemies. 

Q.     And  you  propose  to  better  the  state  of  things  under  the  license  law  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  it  true  that  under  the  old  license  law  people  were  restrained  from 
selling  without  licenses  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  think  not.     I  think  there  were  many  sellers. 

Q.  You  speak  of  being  careful  not  to  employ  a  man  in  a  matter  where  he 
is  to  be  trusted  who  makes  use  of  liquors  ;  do  you  mean  a  moderate  use  ? 

A.  I  mean  a  man  who  is  in  the  habit  of  drinking  liquor  every  day ;  that 
is,  a  man  who  cannot  get  through  a  day  without  a  glass. 

Q.    Do  you  take  ground  against  a  moderate  daily  use  of  liquors  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     You  would  not  go  against  the  occasional  use  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  would  take  ground  against  the  occasional  use  of  liquors, 
although  I  have  kept  it  in  my  house  and  used  it.  I  do  not  believe  that  any 
young  man  is  benefitted  by  the  use  of  liquor. 

Q.     Then  you  reject  the  doctrine  that  liquors  are  good  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir.     I  do  not  believe  in  it  all. 

Q.  What  are  the  habits  of  the  men  whom  you  employ  now  as  compared 
with  the  men  whom  you  employed  twenty  years  ago  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  have  been  particular  to  get,  as  I  say,  temperate  men,  and  I 
think,  therefore,  that  I  have  a  better  class  of  men  than  I  had  twenty  years 
ago. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  of  the  character  of  the  men  in  the  business  houses 
and  firms  around  you  ;  is  there  more  or  less  attention  paid  to  the  fact  of  this 
sobriety  ? 


APPENDIX.  257 

A.  I  think  there  is  more  attention  paid  to  it  than  there  usecl  to  be.  I 
think  the  man  whom  you  employ  for  a  day's  work  is  more  likely  to  get 
employment  if  he  does  not  drink,  than  he  would  be  if  he  drank. 

Q.  Do  you  observe  any  distinction  between  foreigners,  or  do  you  apply 
your  remark  to  people  generally  ? 

A.    I  think  the  remark  applies  generally. 

Q.     So  far  as  you  see  it  in  Cambridge  is  it  among  foreigners  or  Americans  ? 

A.    I  think  it  is  pretty  well  divided  between  them. 

Q.    You  have  a  considerable  Irish  population  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  Irish  people  are  more  addicted  to  it  than  the 
Americans  ? 

A.  As  to  the  laboring  classes,  I  do  not  know  as  there  is  very  much 
difference. 

Q.  Taking  the  laborers  generally  of  the  town  of  West  Cambridge,  do 
you  think  they  are  more  or  less  temperate  than  they  were  fifteen  years  ago  ? 

A.    I  do  not  think  they  are  any  less  temperate. 

Q.  Then  you  would  not  say  that  the  use  of  liquor  as  a  beverage,  or  that 
drunkenness,  so  far  as  your  observation  goes,  has  increased  within  the  last  ten 
or  fifteen  years  ? 

A.  I  should  think  it  had  decreased  rather  than  increased.  That  is  my 
opinion,  but  I  have  not  any  statistics  to  go  from.  It  is  merely  impression. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  I.  S.  LINCOLN. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Your  occupation  and  residence,  if  you  please  ? 
You  are  a  clergyman,  are  you  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  I  reside  in  Warwick,  in  Franklin  County,  and  was  a  clergy- 
man eighteen  years  in  the  county  of  Worcester. 

Q.  I  wish  to  inquire  of  you  as  to  your  observation  in  the  cause  of  temper- 
ance, and  of  the  operation  of  the  present  prohibitory  law,  and  any  reasons 
you  may  have  for  it  ? 

A.  In  relation  to  that  subject,  sir,  I  am  able  to  compare  the  progress  of 
the  cause  of  temperance  under  the  old  license  law,  and  under  the  prohibitory 
laws  that  have  been  enacted  since.  I  became  very  much  interested  in  the 
cause  of  temperance  early.  I  became  connected  with  a  temperance  society 
forty  years  ago  (I  think  in  1827),  in  the  town  of  Gardner,  in  Worcester 
County,  and  I  watched  the  progress  of  the  cause  of  temperance  with  a  great 
deal  of  interest  from  that  time  to  this.  When  the  temperance  cause  began, 
our  efforts  were  directed  solely  to  the  men  who  used  spirits  as  a  beverage. 
These  were  the  class  of  men  who  claimed  our  attention,  before  there  was  any 
prohibitory  law.  We  supposed  our  work  was  to  be  done  by  moral  means,  and 
we  resorted  to  moral  methods ;  and  that  society  in  the  town  of  Gardner,  that 
originated  with  only  nineteen  members,  at  the  time  the  first  prohibitory  law- 
was  passed,  (the  fifteen-gallon  law,  in  1837,)  had  cleared  the  town  of  places 
where  they  sold  liquors  openly.  There  were  two  stores  that  sold  in  large 
quantities  at  the  time  we  commenced,  and  both,  with  moral  influence,  without 
any  reference  to  law  at  all,  gave  up  the  sale  ;  and  I  would  remark,  that  while 
we  relied  on  moral  suasion,  we  had  a  great  many  public  meetings  and  associ- 
83 


258  APPENDIX. 

ciated  several  towns.  I  attended  a  great  many  of  them,  and  in  these  we  were 
most  sure  of  having  full  and  interesting  meetings,  when  temperance  meetings 
were  appointed,  of  any  class  of  meetings  that  I  ever  attended  up  to  the  time 
that  the  prohibitory  law  was  passed.  I  was  surprised  very  much,  (though  my 
whole  heart  was  in  the  cause  of  temperance,)  and  I  must  say  I  was  somewhat 
alarmed  on  account  of  its  influence,  as  I  feared,  upon  the  cause  of  temper- 
ance. It  seemed  to  me  that  the  cause  was  going  on  well  enough  as  it  was. 
We  were  destroying  the  temptation,  and  hence  the  sale  was  being  diminished. 
People  were  prepared  to  face  the  enemy.  They  were  prepared  to  put  on  all 
the  armor  that  we  are  called  to  put  on  in  order  to  meet  all  our  foes,  and  in 
that  panoply  they  knew  how  they  stood  and  how  they  were  meant  to  stand- 
We  remembered  at  the  beginning  that  we  had  an  enemy  to  fight  with,  and 
that  was  temptation ;  but,  in  order  to  make  people  temperate,  we  did  not 
think  it  necessary  that  the  temptation  should  be  removed  out  of  the  world, 
but  that  men  should  be  fortified  against  it,  and  that  is  the  idea  that  we  acted 
upon,  and  we  therefore  appealed  directly  to  the  men  who  used  spirituous 
liquors,  to  induce  them  to  abstain ;  and  I  would  remark  one  fact  as  to  the 
present  prohibitory  law,  (and  which  was  feared  at  the  outset,)  and  which  was, 
that  the  moment  the  prohibitory  law  was  passed,  the  men  who  used  liquor 
moderately  (from  which  class  we  were  getting  the  greatest  number  to  join 
our  temperance  association)  said :  Now  you  are  taking  measures  to  compel 
us  to  abandon  our  cups,  and  now  you  are  making  a  law  to  prevent  us  from 
buying  and  drinking  what  we  desire.  Now  we  say  we  will  assert  our  right  to 
use,  and  no  man  has  a  right  to  prohibit  us  from  using,  unless  we  use  it  in  such 
a  way  as  to  intrude  upon  the  rights  of  others.  Every  man  admitted  drunken- 
ness to  be  wrong.  The  result  was,  that  the  passing  of  a  prohibitory  law, 
operating  against  the  use  of  moral  suasion  in  this  way,  drove  these  men  right 
off  from  us,  and  they  would  not  come  near  our  meetings.  Before  that  we  had 
their  ear.  We  did  not  take  the  ground  that  it  was  a  sin  in  itself  to  use  it 
moderately,  but  that  it  was  a  sin  to  use  it  excessively,  and  so  as  to  injure  their 
health  and  make  them  dangerous  members  of  society.  Why  did  we  ask  them 
to  abstain  from  it  ?  Because  it  was  a  dangerous  article  to  use  ;  and  though 
some  might  use  it  without  impairing  their  health,  yet  vast  multitudes  found 
their  appetites  increasing  as  they  used  it,  and  found  themselves  at  last  in  the 
depths  of  intemperance.  That  is  the  argument  we  used  to  induce  them  to 
become  temperance  men ;  and  it  seems  to  me  that  the  cause  of  temperance 
has  gone  back  since  the  enactment  of  the  first  prohibitory  law,  and  there  has 
been  a  very  great  change,  and  I  attribute  all  the  good,  under  this  law,  to  the 
influence  of  moral  suasion.  All,  I  think,  that  we  can  ask  of  a  law,  is  to 
punish  men  who  use  liquor  to  the  injury  of  others. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  in  the  county  of  Franklin,  how  is  the  cause  of 
temperance  to-day,  as  compared  with  the  times  to  which  you  allude  ? 

A.  I  was  not  in  Franklin  County  at  the  time  I  alluded  to  first;  I  was  in 
the  county  of  Worcester  when  the  two  systems  were  tried ;  I  did  not  get  to 
the  county  of  Franklin  till  within  the  last  fourteen  years. 

Q.     During  that  time,  how  was  the  cause  ? 

A.  The  county  of  Franklin  has  no  city,  and  no  very  large  villages  or 
places  in  it.  And  I  think  that  there  is  very  little  intemperance  among  the 


APPENDIX.  259 

people  of  that  county,  especially  the  American  population.  There  is  some, 
but  as  far  as  my  knowledge  extends  (I  am  merely  acquainted  with  a  few  of 
the  towns  in  the  county),  I  should  think  that,  since  I  have  been  there,  there 
had  been  a  large  amount  of  intemperance. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  McCLELLAN.)  What  is  the  opinion  of  temperance  men  in 
regard  to  cider  ? 

A.  So  far  as  I  know,  they  are  in  favor  of  its  use.  There  is  not  as  much 
cider  manufactured  now  as  years  ago  ;  but  I  think  that  those  who  manufac- 
ture it  are  temperate  in  other  respects,  but  are  in  favor  of  using  that. 

Q.  Does  it  detract  from  a  man's  influence  as  a  temperance  man  to  affirm 
that  he  has  cider  in  his  cellar,  and  occasionally  drinks  it  ? 

A.  I  have  not  supposed  that  it  did,  in  that  county.  I  know  a  great  many 
that  use  a  little  cider  because  they  have  an  impressioa  that  it  is  conducive  to 
their  health ;  and  they  use  it  with  their  meals. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  temperance  men,  do  you  mean  men  who  belong 
to  temperance  societies  ? 

A.    There  are  some  who  do. 

Q.    Is  it  the  general  rule  ? 

A.  They  do  not  use  it  freely.  They  will  buy  a  barrel  of  cider,  and  boil 
it  down,  drinking  a  little  while  it  is  sweet,  and  letting  the  rest  go  for  vinegar. 
There  is  not  much  cider  used  in  the  county ;  but  it  is  used,  I  know,  by  a 
number  of  clergymen,  who  have  been  strong  temperance  men,  but  who  have 
been  advised  by  physicians,  on  account  of  some  dyspeptic  or  bilious  troubles, 
to  use  it,  and  they  do  so. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Have  you  ever  known  a  time  when  less  liquor 
was  used  in  a  community  like  that  you  now  live  in,  than  at  present  ? 

A.  I  am  not  able  to  settle  that  point.  In  the  town  where  I  reside,  I  think 
more  was  used,  and  more  purchased  from  the  liquor  agency  in  this  city  than 
for  a  number  of  years. 

Q.    Is  there  any  open  place  of  sale  in  your  town  except  the  agency  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    You  have  a  considerable  foreign  population  in  that  town? 

A,     No,  sir. 

Q.     How  many  ? 

A.     There  may  be  six  or  seven  families. 

Q.     What  is  the  principal  business  of  your  town  ? 

A.    The  most  valuable  is  pine  lumber. 

Q.     What  other  leading  business  ? 

A.  The  tanning  business  is  carried  on  to  a  considerable  extent.  There  is 
a  boot  manufactory — not  large.  But  the  farming  interests  are  carried  on 
more  extensively. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  FAY.)    Did  you  say  more  was  bought  by  the  agency  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Is  any  of  that  used  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  We  were  a  little  unfortunate  in  our  town.  Our  town  agent  was  a 
man  that  used  liquor,  and  used  it  pretty  freely,  himself.  It  was  supposed  that 
it  was  sold  by  this  agent  pretty  freely  for  any  purposes  whatever.  I  rannot 


260  APPENDIX. 

say  but  that  people  who  bought  It  would  say  that  they  wanted  it  for  mechani- 
cal and  medicinal  purposes. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Have  you  entertained  the  same  opinion  touching 
the  principle  of  the  prohibition  policy  of  Massachusetts,  in  regard  to  pro- 
hibiting the  sale  of  liquors,  that  you  now  entertain,  for  several  years  back  ? 

A.  It  seemed  to  me  that  the  operations  of  it  were  adverse  to  the  influence 
of  moral  suasion. 

Q.  Have  you,  at  any  time,  say  within  two  years,  expressed  an  opinion  in 
favor  of  the  policy  of  Massachusetts  on  this  head  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Were  you  a  member  of  the  legislature  two  years  ago  ? 

A.    No,  sir.    I  was  a  member  at  the  last  session  and  four  years  ago. 

Q.  Did  you  at  that  time  express  an  opinion  favorable  to  the  policy  of  the 
State  in  that  respect  ? 

A .  I  do  not  recollect  that  I  ever  did.  I  should  not  be  likely  to,  as  I  have 
never  had  such  an  opinion.  I  had  feared  that  it  would  operate  as  it  seems  to 
me  that  it  has. 

Q.  Then  your  opinion  from  the  beginning  has  been  that  the  law  was  not  a 
proper  instrumentality  for  this  purpose  ? 

A.  It  seemed  to  me  that  the  instrumentality  of  the  law  was  not  correct. 
It  seems  to  me  that  the  present  law  is  not  on  the  right  principle. 

Q.     Precisely  why  not  ? 

A.  For  this  reason,  that  the  law  makes  the  sale  of  alcoholic  liquors  a 
wrong,  and  at  the  same  time  it  does  not  make  the  buying  and  the  use  of  it 
for  a  beverage  a  wrong.  The  man  who  sells  the  liquor  is  made  responsible 
for  the  use  of  it  after  it  has  passed  out  of  his  hands,  it  seems  to  me.  I  have 
always  taken  this  ground :  that  the  use  of  alcoholic  liquors  as  a  beverage  is 
dangerous,  but  is  not  a  sin  in  itself,  though  it  may  lead  to  intemperance,  and 
to  all  the  evils  which  flow  from  it,  which  cannot  be  described. 

Q.  And  you  recognize  the  great  evils  of  immoderate  drinking  under  the 
present  laws  ? 

A.  I  mean  this  fact, — that  a  man  could  not  become  intemperate  unless 
liquor  were  used  at  first  moderately. 

Q.     Do  you  admit  that  it  is  dangerous  to  use  it  in  this  way  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Now,  when  a  great  social  evil  exists,  is  it  not  necessary  to  put  it  away  ? 

A.  Certainly,  I  think  it  is.  But  there  has  been  a  great  trouble  with  me 
to  take  the  ground  that  the  law  is  right,  when  it  does  not  carry  the  con- 
sciences of  the  multitude  with  it ;  because  I  could  not  make  them  feel  that  it 
was  a  sin  to  use  this  liquor  moderately  as  a  beverage,  in  the  same  way  that  a 
man  feels  that  it  is  a  sin  to  take  another's  property. 

Q.     Have  you  used  your  influence  to  diminish  this  evil  ? 

A.    It  has  been  my  life-long  business. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  it  is  a  sin  not  to  lend  one's  influence  to  put  away  the 
causes  of  these  great  social  evils  ? 

A.  Certainly,  I  do,  sir.  But  the  question  is,  what  kind  of  influence  is 
adapted  to  the  end,  and  is  innocent  and  right. 


APPENDIX.  261 

Q.  Now,  do  you  suppose  you  can  have  a  general  and  moderate  use  of 
liquor  as  a  beverage,  without  these  great  social  evils  springing  out  of  that 
use  ?  Do  you,  as  a  Christian  minister,  believe  that  ? 

A.  I  presume  that,  as  long  as  men,  using  spirit  more  or  less,  will  become 
intemperate,  and  involve  themselves  in  all  the  evils  of  intemperance  ;  but  I 
take  the  ground  that  we  have  no  legal  right  to  punish  a  man  for  the  use  of 
liquor,  unless  that  use  of  liquor  leads  him  to  violate  the  rights  of  others. 

Q.  Does  the  immoderate  use  of  liquors,  or  do  the  present  social  evils  which 
you  recognize,  violate  the  rights  of  others  ?  In  families,  where  any  member 
is  an  inebriate,  and  honest  industry  is  taxed  to  repair  the  ravages,  are  not  all 
of  these  taxes  violations  of  the  rights  of  others  ? 

A.  I  admit  that  when  a  man  uses  liquor  so  as  t'o  become  a  dangerous 
member  of  society,  the  law  may  take  him  as  a  criminal  and  punish  him ;  but 
until  he  has  used  liquor  in  such  a  way  as  to  violate  the  rights  of  others,  the 
law  has  no  right  to  treat  him  as  a  criminal. 

Q.  Do  you  deny  that  the  law  has  a  right  to  punish  for  the  moderate  use 
of  liquor  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  deny  that  the  government  has  a  right  to  prohibit  the  sale  ? 

A.  The  government  have  a  right  to  prohibit  all  the  injurious  sale,  but  not 
the  sale  itself,  in  toto.  The  present  law  is  based  on  the  supposition  that  there 
is  a  sale  that  is  right. 

Q-  Do  you  believe  that  the  government  has  a  right  to  prohibit  ninety-nine 
in  every  hundred  from  selling  for  any  purposes  whatever  ? 

A.     I  should  think  it  had. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  it  has  a  right  to  prevent  the  hundredth  man  from 
selling  for  any  purposes  whatever  ? 

A.  If  the  public  good  requires  that  the  sale  be  limited  to  a  few,  because 
of  its  being  a  dangerous  article,  and  because  men  of  a  certain  character 
would  sell  it  to  the  injury  of  others,  I  believe  that  the  government  has  a 
right  to  prevent  it. 

Q.  Then  you  believe  that  the  government  have  a  right  to  restrict  the  one 
man  in  a  hundred  without  regard  to  the  inherent  right  of  selling  ? 

A.     I  regard  this  the  same  as  I  regard  the  sale  of  gunpowder. 

Q.  If  the  government  has  the  right  to  prohibit  ninety-nine  men  in  a  hun- 
dred, why  not  the  hundredth,  if  the  public  good  requires  ? 

A.  The  public  sentiments  on  that  point  are  different.  I  think  that  each 
man  has  a  right  to  use  liquors  so  long  as  he  does  not  injure  himself  and  others 
by  the  use  ? 

Q.   (By  Mr.  Me  CLELL AN.)   What  religious  denomination  do  you  belong  to  ? 

A.     Unitarian,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  JOSEPH  ANDREWS. 
Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 
A.     At  present  in  Boston. 
Q.    What  is  your  business  ? 
A.    Engraving. 


262  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Have  you  travelled  abroad  and  know  something  of  the  habits  in  regard 
to  temperance  in  other  countries  ? 

A.  I  have  been  abroad  three  different  times  and  have  lived  in  the  country 
some  part  of  my  life. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  inform  the  Committee  what  are  the  habits 
as  to  the  use  of  what  are  called  intoxicating  liquors  in  foreign  lands  ? 

A.  I  resided  in  the  city  of  Paris  once  for  two  months,  following  my  pro- 
fession, and  afterwards  for  a  year  and  a  half.  The  subject  of  intemperance 
has  always  been  prominent  in  my  mind.  For  that  reason,  without  any  par- 
ticular attention  to  the  subject,  day  by  day,  whenever  anything  that  bore  upon 
it  met  my  eye,  I  became  cognizant  of  it.  During  my  residence  in  Paris, 
(and  I  should  say  that  my  only  leisure  time  for  recreation  was  Sunday  after- 
noon,) after  worshipping  with  those  whom  I  was  in  the  habit  of  worshipping 
•with,  I  went,  whenever  the  weather  would  permit,  into  the  different  neigh- 
borhoods of  Paris.  Whoever  knows  Paris,  knows  that  the  streets  lead  out 
from  the  centre  in  different  directions,  and  I  was  accustomed  to  take  on  one 
Sunday  one  road,  and  on  another,  another ;  and,  therefore,  I  had  a  chance  to 
observe  the  operation  of  drinking  in  the  outskirts  of  Paris.  As  I  said  before, 
the  first  time  I  was  in  Paris  was  but  two  months.  I  was  very  busy  and  had 
not  so  much  opportunity  to  observe.  I  saw  no  one  intoxicated  during  that 
time.  In  the  year,  however,  that  I  resided  there  the  last  time,  when  I  had 
more  leisure,  I  saw  only  two  persons  intoxicated.  One  case  was  of  a  man 
who  was  some  little  distance  from  me  in  the  street ;  the  other  of  a  postillion 
riding  a  horse,  whom  I  distinctly  saw.  He  was  a  little  "  over  the  bay,"  but 
not  so  intoxicated  but  that  he  could  ride  his  horse.  In  the  outskirts,  it  is  well 
known  that  Sunday  is  a  day  for  drinking.  As  I  passed  different  localities,  I 
noticed  that  the  places  where  this  liquor  was  drank  and  sold,  were  all  open 
to  the  observer.  I  used  to  stop  and  look  in,  but  I  do  not  know  as  lever  went 
into  any  of  them.  I  observed  that  they  drank  freely  of  wine  on  the  outskirts, 
because  the  duty  is  not  charged  on  the  liquor  at  all  until  after  it  is  brought 
into  the  city  proper.  I  do  not  recollect  seeing  anything  out  of  the  way.  Of 
course  they  were  sometimes  noisy ;  but  I  do  not  recollect  seeing  any  one  that 
we  should  call  here  drunk.  This  was  the  case  also  in  Italy  and  Florence ; 
and  in  a  short  trip  to  Rome  and  Naples,  I  have  no  recollection  of  seeing  any 
one  intoxicated.  .In  Florence,  in  the  winter,  grapes  and  wine  could  be 
obtained  very  cheap.  Wine  was  always  given  to  the  servants  ;  that  was  part 
of  the  arrangement  that  was  made  with  them.  From  my  own  observation  in 
the  matter,  I  am  entirely  of  the  conviction  that  there  is  no  possibility  of  a 
country  like  ours  becoming  temperate  without  the  use  of  pure  and  cheap 
wine. 

Q.  What  portion  of  the  population,  in  these  various  observations  which 
you  made,  came  under  your  observation  ? 

A.  All,  except  the  higher  classes,  perhaps.  There  was  one  gentlemen  of 
quite  high  station,  comparatively,  that  I  used  to  visit ;  but  as  a  general  rule, 
it  wa§  of  course  to  observe  the  mass  of  the  people,  as  I  saw  them  in  the 
gardens  and  about  the  environs  of  Paris. 

Q.     Of  course,  on  Sunday,  the  masses  go  out  into  the  country  considerably  ? 


APPENDIX.  263 

A.  Yes,  sir;  almost  universally.  It  is  their  only  recreation.  They  work 
very  hard  all  the  week,  and  it  is,  as  I  regard  it,  their  only  recreation,  to  go 
into  the  country  on  Sundays. 

Q.  As  to  the  effects  of  these  habits  of  drinking  wine,  as  compared  with 
the  drinking  of  distilled  liquor ;  have  you  any  observation  ? 

A.  Not  particularly,  except  that  some  of  those  who  began  life  with  me, 
who  got  into  the  habit  of  drinking  intoxicating  liquor,  have  lost  themselves  ; 
and  those  who  have  used  wine  with  their  food  have  not,  and  I  have  come  to 
the  same  conclusion  that  I  had  before. 

Q.  How  is  it  in  Paris  compared  with  Boston,  as  to  the  use  of  distilled 
liquors,  and  as  to  intemperance  ? 

A.  I  should  think  there  was  no  comparison  from  my  observation.  I  should 
suppose  there  were  comparatively  no  spirituous  liquors  drank  there,  as  com- 
pared- with  those  which  are  drank  here :  and  as  I  said  I  only  saw  two  instances 
in  the  year  and  a  half. 

Q.  I  would  inquire  if  you  know  anything  about  the  fact  that  the  liquors 
brought  to  this  country  have  been  fortified  ?  Is  there  any  difficulty  in 
importing  them. 

A.  That  I  am  not  able  to  say.  I  have  a  general  impression  that  some 
little  alcohol  is  put  in,  but  it  is  a  mere  trifle. 

Q.  Have  you  any  observation  as  to  the  state  of  things  in  Boston  and  in 
this  country  ?  You  reside  in  Boston  now,  do  you  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Not  particularly  as  to  the  drinking,  etc. ;  but  if  it  is  proper 
to  state,  I  have  some  observation  in  regard  to  the  -operation  of  this  law,  and 
in  reference  to  the  idea  of  the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  Will  you  be  good  enough  to  state  it.  Give  the  conclusion  of  your 
own  mind. 

.  A.     I  think  a  prohibitory  law  is  injurious  to  the  true  and  pre-eminent 
cause  of  temperance. 

Q.     Will  you  state  very  briefly  the  reason  of  that  conclusion  ? 

A.  It  is  because  in  the  first  place  I  think  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  the 
great  majority  of  men,  and  women,  too,  can  be  made  to  drink  nothing  but 
cold  water.  In  the  second  place,  I  think  it  strikes  at  the  very  foundation  of 
a  man's  moral  character.  In  order  to  reform  a  man,  and  in  order  to  reform 
society,  there  must  be  freedom ;  and  I  think  that  this  prohibitory  system  arises 
from  a  one-sided  and  fanatical  idea.  It  has  not  for  that  reason  the  Divine 
Providence  behind  it,  and  it  can  never  be  enforced  ;  or,  if  it  could  be,  it 
could  never  prevail  for  good.  It  has  nothing  in  the  Divine  Providence  to 
support  it,  and  it  has  not  the  best  judgment  and  the  best  feeling-  of  the  better 
part  of  the  most  intelligent  portion  of  the  community  to  support  it. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     What  is  your  definition  of  fanaticism  ? 

A.  Anything  that  leads  men,  however  wise  and  however  good,  to  leave 
out  other  considerations  in  following  one  particular  idea. 

Q.    Is  the  idea  that  is  wholly  true  in  itself  and  in  its  results  fanatical  ? 

A.  The  idea  itself  being  true,  the  carrying  out  of  it  is  not  necessarily 
fanatical,  but  the  manner  of  carrying  it  forward  may  be. 

Q.    If  a  proposition  embraces  truth  and  only  truth,  is  that  fanaticism  ? 

A.    The  proposition  is  not  fanatical. 


264  APPENDIX. 

Q.  If  you  were  to  act  upon  that  proposition,  would  your  action  be 
fanatical  ? 

A.    If  I  left  out  of  sight  every  other  consideration,  it  would  be. 

Q.     Is  not  all  truth  harmonious  ? 

A.  It  is  harmonious ;  but  the  Divine  Providence  teaches  that  in  its  opera- 
tions and  in  its  words,  we  must  sometimes  bend  to  circumstances. 

Q.     Does  the  Divine  Providence  accommodate  itself  to  wicked  men  ? 

A.     The  Divine  Providence  accommodate  itself  by  bending,  not  breaking. 

Q.     Does  it  so' as  not  to  punish  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     How  does  it  bend  divine  law  to  wicked  men  ? 

A.  By  allowing  them  to  go  on  to  such  a  stage  that  they  fear  of  their  loss  of 
freedom.  There  can  be  no  reform,  in  niy  mind,  without  freedom.  Nobody 
can  become  a  temperate  man  by  being  prevented  from  getting  liquor. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  of  the  possibility  of  growing  a  generation  of  men 
whose  influence  in  the  community  shall  be  in  favor  of  the  prohibition  of  the 
sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  think  that  the  prohibition  of  the  sale  of  liquor  is  a  wrong  ? 

A.  It  comes  to  this,  that  the  selling  of  liquor  is  said  to  be  a  sin,  and  the 
drinking  of  liquor  is  not  a  sin. 

Q.     Is  a  course  of  life  that  promotes  intoxication,  a  sin  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Is  a  course  of  life  that  promotes  drunkenness  a  sin  ? 

A.    No,  sir;  the  sins  are  plainly  put  down  in  the  ten  commandments. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  command  which  exhorts  you,  and  bids  you  to  abhor  that 
which  acts  to  promote  an  evil  ? 

A.    No,  sir;  not  that  I  am  aware  of. 

Q.    Is  it  not  a  sin  to  disobey  an  injunction  of  the  Saviour  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.     And  His  apostles  ? 

A.  Well,  I  do  not  know  about  His  apostles.  I  regard  the  Lord  as 
authority  and  nobody  else. 

Q.  You  do  not  deem  it  a  violation  of  duty  to  pursue  a  course  of  action 
out  of  which  all  the  existing  evils  of  drunkenness  arise  ? 

A.     There  may  be  some  sort  of  catch  in  that  question,  and,  therefore,  I 
'  would  answer  it  in  this  way  :    I  consider  that  it  is  a  duty  to  do  everything  we 
can  to  promote  the  good  of  our  fellow-creatures. 

Q.     Temperance  included  ? 

A.     Temperance  included. 

Q.     Total  abstinence  ? 

A-    No,  sir, 

Q.  On  the  principle  on  which  you  stand,  if  a  law  by  which  a  man  should 
live  is  that  of  moderate  drinking,  how  would  you,  by  any  social  arrangements, 
customs  or  laws,  affect  the  question  so  long  as  you  encouraged  the  moderate 
use,  and  so  long  as  the  moderate  use  tended  to  immoderate  use,  and  so  long 
as  you  approach  the  laws,  so  far  as  you  were  able  to  discover  ? 
i  A.  I  deny  the  premises, 


APPENDIX.  265 

Q.    Do  you  think  that  moderate  drinking  is  useful  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  maintain  that  total  abstinence  would  be  beneficial  to  the  com- 
munity ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     Precisely  what  do  you  maintain  ? 

A.  I  mean  that  a  man  may  drink  moderately  without  injury  ;  but  I  do  not 
say  that  that  is  a  sanction  for  moderate  drinking. 

Q.  You  would  not  recommend  the  State  to  favor  the  policy  of  abstinence 
rather  than  of  indulgence  ? 

A.  I  would  recommend  any  State  or  any  body  of  legislators  to  make  a  law 
that  should  be  based  upon  the  principle  of  total  abstinence,  because  I  believe 
that  if  you  restrain  from  drinking  entirely,  and  if  you  prevent  a  man  by  law 
or  by  force  from  drinking  when  he  feels  a  craving  for  it,  you  will  only  force 
him  into  a  worse  position,  and  he  would  do  something  worse  to  his  character 
and  to  the  community  than  he  would  if  not  resisted  in  this  way. 

Q.  Would  you  recommend  the  State  to  make  any  law  on  the  subject  of 
the  sale  of  liquors. 

A.  As  to  that,  sir,  I  do  not  feel  as  if  I  knew  anything  about  it.  I  feel 
perfect  confidence  in  any  set  of  men  who  love  their  fellow-men  and  who 
should  come  together  and  endeavor  to  frame  such  laws  without  any  idea  of 
their  own  personal  prejudices. 

•  Q.  I  do  not  ask  whether  you  would  have  any  particular  law,  or  whether 
you  would  have,  upon  the  principles  which  you  enunciate,  any  desire  that  the 
government  should  make  any  law  whatsoever. 

A.  I  do  not  consider  myself  wise  enough  to  frame  a  precise  law,  and  I 
should  be  willing  to  leave  it  to  the  most  rational  and  wise  men  to  decide. 

Q.    Why  does  not  your  principle  include  the  present  law  ? 

A.  It  does,  sir,  if  the  community  decide  in  favor  of  it ;  but  it  must  come  to 
an  end  eventually. 

TESTIMONY  OF  OLIVER  STACKPOLE. 
Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 
A.    I  live  in  this  city. 
Q.    What  business  are  you  engaged  in  ? 
A.    I  keep  a  public  house. 
Q.     What  house  ? 
A.    National  House. 

Q.    Do  you  sell  intoxicating  liquors  at  all  ? 
A.     I  do  not. 

Q.     Have  you  ever  kept  liquors  since  you  have  been  there  ? 
A.    I  never  have  sold  a  drop,  directly  or  indirectly,  since  I  have  been 
there. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  connected  with  this  hotel  ? 
A.    I  have  been  there  a  little  more  than  nine  years. 
Q.    Where  were  you  before  you  came  to  Boston  ? 
A.    I  lived  in  the  State  of  Maine. 
Q.    What  was  your  business  there  ? 
34 


266  APPENDIX. 

A.     A  portion  of  the  time  that  was  my  business  in  Portland. 

Q.     Was  a  portion  of  that  time  at  the  time  the  Maine  Law  was  enforced  ? 

A.  It  was.  I  was  in  Portland  at  the  time  Neal  Dow  was  Mayor  of  the 
city. 

Q.  Did  you  tako  an  active  part  in  the  temperance  movement  at  that 
time? 

A.  I  was  very  favorable  to  it.  I  do  not  know  that  I  took  any  active  part 
any  more  than  to  speak  in  favor  of  It. 

Q.     You  were  in  favor  of  that  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     What  is  your  observation  in  regard  to  it  ? 

A.     I  think  it  disappoints  its  most  sanguine  friends. 

Q.     What  was  the  effect  of  it  ? 

A.  As  to  the  removal  and  suspension  of  the  drinking  of  liquor,  it  did  not 
have  the  desired  effect. 

Q.     How  was  it  in  regard  to  the  state  of  intemperance:  did  it  increase ? 

A.  According  to  my  general  observation,  I  should  say  that  it  did  not. 
Among  certain  classes  it  increased  during  a  certain  time  ;  and  that  class  of 
people  were  of  the  higher  order. 

Q.     What  means  were  resorted  to,  to  prevent  the  drinking  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  you  all  have  heard  the  same  that  I  have  heard;  there 
were  all  manner  of  inventions  resorted  to  that  could  be  thought  of,  for  the 
supplying  of  liquors.  I  believe  that  sometimes  it  was  brought  in  double- 
barrels  and  in  barrels  in  a  barrel,  and  I  have  heard  it  said,  (and  I  think  cor- 
rectly, too,)  that  they  even  resorted  to  putting  it  in  coffins.  These  stories  I 
have  heard,  and  I  think  they  are  correct. 

Q.     During  observations  of  that  law,  did  it  license  improper  men  ? 

A.  Not  so  far  as  I  know  within  my  own  observation.  I  think  it  did  not, 
as  far  as  Portland  is  concerned. 

Q.     Was  liquor  easily  obtained  by  anybody  that  wanted  it  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was.  I  have  no  doubt  of  it.  One  mode  that  was  resorted 
to,  which  I  was  told  of,  (I  was  never  in  these  places,)  was,  that  young  men 
hired  rooms,  and  hired  a  man  to  take  care  of  the  rooms,  and  had  their  liquor 
taken  to  these  rooms ;  and  that  they  resorted  there  very  much  nights.  So 
much  so,  that  there  seemed  to  be  an  unpleasant  feeling  in  regard  to  the  state 
of  things  in  reference  to  these  young  men.  In  other  words,  it  did  not  meet 
their  expectations.  It  certainly  did  not  mine. 

Q.  How  was  it  with  regard  to  the  friends  of  the  law  :  were  they  disap- 
pointed or  satisfied  ? 

A.  As  far  as  I  know,  sir,  I  will  admit,  that,  occasionally,  I  heard  a  man 
who  was  in  favor  of  it  say  that  he  was  disappointed.  But,  generally,  I  do 
not  know  what  the  feeling  was,  on  the  part  of  its  friends,  at  that  time. 

Q.     Since  then,  have  you  heard  ? 

A.  Since  then,  I  have  heard  a  great  many  men,  from  different  parts  of 
the  State,  give  it  as  their  opinion,  that  they  had  been  very  sadly  and  sorrow- 
fully disappointed.  It  did  not  meet  what  they  expected.  I  was  recently 
talking  with  one  of  the  policemen  who  was  there  at  that  time,  and  who  was  a 
strong  temperance  man.  I  believe  he  had  lived  there  a  good  many  years ; 


APPENDIX.  267 

and  from  his  experience,  he  began  to  feel  very  doubtful,  and  had,  in  fact, 
began  to  change  his  mind,  and  to  think  that  there  should  be  some  law  to 
control  this  "  broadcast  slyness,"  as  he  expressed  it,  which  was  observable. 

Q.  What  observation  have  you  in  Boston,  within  the  last  year  or  two,  in 
regard  to  intemperance,  and  as  to  whether  it  has  increased  or  not  ? 

A.  If  I  simply  give  my  own  opinion,  I  should  say  that  I  have  been 
inclined  to  think  that  it  is  increasing,  and  rather  unpleasantly. 

Q.  Without  taking  into  account  your  own  observation,  what  is  your 
opinion  in  regard  to  a  prohibitory  law,  or  a  law  that  should  regulate  and  con- 
trol the  sale,  and  should  permit  the  sale  to  some  extent  ? 

A.  I  have  come  to  the  conclusion  within  a  few  years,  and  more  especially 
within  a  year,  that  it  really  would  be  desirable  if  there  was  some  law  by 
which  the  sale  of  liquor  might  be  regulated ;  such  as  we  call  a  license  law. 

Q.    Have  you  any  reason  for  that,  which  you  could  state  in  a  word  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  but  I  might  give  you  some  reason. 

Q.     Will  you  be  kind  enought  to  state  your  reason  ? 

A:  I  suppose  we  find  ourselves  under  the  present  system,  with  a  great  deal 
of  liquor  to  use  in  the  State  and  in  the  nation.  We  also  find  a  class  of  people 
amongst  us  that  are  inclined  to  have  something  which  is  exhilarating.  We 
have  it  here,  and  if  we  have  no  means  to  stop  its  coming  here,  I  do  not 
know  whether  it  is  not  the  part  of  wisdom  to  devise  some  plan  by  which  to 
regulate  the  sale  of  it.  I  do  not  think  that  the  present  prohibitory  law  has 
stopped  the  drinking  of  one  glass  of  liquor ;  and  for  all  the  places  that  we 
hear  of  being  stopped,  I  think  there  are  as  many  places  where  liquor  can  be 
obtained.  Another  reason  that  I  will  assign  for  some  kind  of  a  law  that 
should  regulate  the  sale  is,  that  it  appears  that  at  present  they  are  seizing 
liquors,  and  I  suppose  that  the  seizing  of  liquors  does  not  prevent  the  liquor 
being  drank  ;  and  then,  too,  it  is  a  great  expense  ;  and  I  am  of  the  opinion 
that  you  or  I,  or  our  children,  before  twenty  years,  will  have  to  be  taxed  to 
pay  every  dollar  of  this  expense ;  and  in  addition  to  that,  I  have  no  doubt 
that  for  every  one  hundred  dollars  expended,  there  will  be  a  cost  to  the  State 
of  a  thousand  dollars ;  and  for  that  reason,  I  think  it  is  not  practicable  to 
prohibit  the  sale.  That  is  my  idea,  and  I  will  give  you  my  opinion  more 
directly  on  this  point.  I  think  that  there  will  be  petitions  to  the  legislature, 
year  after  year,  and  the  time  that  will  be  consumed  in  the  legislature,  and  all 
the  expenses  which  will  be  incurred,  will  cost  all  of  a  thousand  dollars  for 
every  hundred  dollars  now  involved  in  the  question,  in  my  humble  opinion. 

Q.  If  there  was  such  a  law  as  the  one  you  suggest,  would  it  make  any 
change  in  your  own  habits  in  the  keeping  of  a  public  house  ? 

A.  I  will  answer  that  question  in  a  very  few  words.  Early  in  life,  thirty- 
five  or  more  years  ago,  I  joined  the  first  temperance  society  that  I  ever  heard 
of.  I  joined  it  cheerfully,  and  I  have  never  drank  a  glass  of  liquor  as  a  bev- 
erage from  that  day  to  this.  Twice  I  have  been  brought  very  low  and  the 
physicians  prescribed  liquor.  That  was  a  year  since.  So  far  as  my  interest 
is  concerned,  I  am  not  aware  that  it  would  affect  me  directly  or  indirectly. 

Q.    You  would  not  avail  yourself  of  such  a  law  for  the  purposes  of  selling  ? 

A.    I  never  should  sell  it,  law  or  no  law. 


268  APPENDIX. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  speak  of  your  residence  in  Portland  ;  what 
was  the  effect  as  to  the  increase  or  decrease  there  ? 

A.  I  speak  of  my  experience.  I  think  it  did  not  decrease  so  far  as  the 
city  is  concerned. 

Q.    What  is  the  fact  as  to  liquors  or  statistics  of  crime  and  drunkenness  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  am  not  prepared  to  give  statistics.  I  only  give  my 
observation. 

Q.  Was  not  the  Maine  Law  a  subject  of  general  interest  there  during  its 
first  existence  ? 

A.  With  a  certain  portion  of  the  community  I  think  it  was.  I  am  not 
prepared  to  say  that  it  was  throughout  the  State. 

Q.  Did  not  Neal  Dow's  operations  attract  great  attention  there,  as  well  as 
elsewhere  ? 

A.     They  did,  sir. 

Q-  Can  you  call  to  mind  the  fact  as  to  the  cases  of  drunkenness  and  of 
other  crimes,  and  as  to  the  attendance  at  the  jails  at  that  time  ? 

A.    I  could  not  give  you  any  account  whatever.    I  do  not  recollect. 

Q.     What  is  the  opinion  of  the  people  of  Portland  now  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know,  sir. 

Q.     What  do  you  think  it  is  throughout  the  State  of  Maine  ? 

A.  I  am  not  prepared  to  say,  sir.  When  you  speak  of  the  general  effect, 
I  might  say  that  I  have  come  in  contact  with  people  in  various  parts  of  the 
State,  and  that  so  far  as  I  have  seen,  the  opinion  has  been  very  general  that 
the  Maine  Law  had  not  met  their  most  sanguine  expectations. 

Q.     Did  it  not  meet  some  of  their  expectations  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  people  might  admit  that  in  some  of  the  smaller  places  it 
might  have  done  some  good ;  but  so  far  as  the  larger  cities  were  concerned  I 
think  it  is  not  so. 

Q.     Has  the  Maine  Law  been  sustained  here,  or  not  ? 

A.    It  has  been  on  the  statute-book. 

Q.     Did  it  not  come  into  the  elections  every  year  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Did  it  not  show  that  the  people  were  still  in  favor  of  it  ? 

A.    I  am  not  prepared  to  say  that  it  did. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  McCLELLAN.)     How  long  have  you  been  keeper  of  a  hotel  ? 

A.     A  little  more  than  nine  years  in  this  city,  and  in  Portland  about  three. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  necessary,  in  keeping  a  first-class  hotel,  to  have  liquors 
sold? 

A.  I  know  but  little  about  it.  I  am  not  prepared  to  say.  I  have  the 
impression  that  that  is  not  the  subject  before  the  Committee. 

Q.    I  should  like  to  have  that  question  answered  ? 

^4.  I  can  only  say  that  there  are  many  people  travelling  who  will  have 
liquor,  and  if  they  cannot  get  it  in  one  place  they  go  to  another.  I  think  that 
in  large  houses  and  in  first-class  hotels,  in  order  to  satisfy  the  travelling 
community,  it  is  necessary  to  have  it. 

Adjourned. 


APPENDIX.  269 


NINTH    DAY. 

WEDNESDAY,  March  6th,  18G7. 

The  Committee  met  at  nine  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  the  testimony  on  behalf 
of  the  petitioners  was  continued. 

TESTIMONY  OF  RIGHT  REV.  BISHOP  MAXTOX  EASTBURN,  D.  D. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Your  residence  and  position  are  known.  I 
desire  that  you  should  inform  the  Committee  of  your  opinion,  formed  from 
observations  which  you  have  made,  of  the  value  of  the  present  prohibitory 
liquor  law,  in  the  suppression  of  intemperance,  as  compared  with  some  other 
law,  permitting  the  sale  of  liquor  under  proper  restrictions. 

A.  My  observations  are  not  as  extensive  as  are  those  of  some  of  the 
clergymen  of  my  charge,  who  are  more  among  the  poor,  but  so  far  as  my 
observation  has  gone,  both  from  my  personal  contact  with  the  poor,  which  is 
considerable,  and  from  information  derived  from  those  who  have  visited  them 
in  my  behalf,  my  impression  is  that  intemperance  has  been  increasing  for 
several  years  in  this  city. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  of  the  value  of  the  present  law,  as  compared 
with  some  modification  which  would  permit  the  sale  of  liquor  under  certain 
restrictions  ? 

A.  I  am  decidedly  in  favor  of  a  license  law  and  against  a  prohibitory 
law  ;  I  do  not  think  tl&t  a  prohibitory  law  can  be  carried  out. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  in  the  principles  which  lie  at  the  foundation  of  a 
prohibitory  law,  inconsistent  with  the  moral  means  employed  to  accomplish  a 
temperance  reform  ? 

A.  I  think  that  moral  means  are  the  only  ones  to  be  used.  I  am  in  favor 
of  a  license  law,  because  it  would  restrain  the  sale  of  liquor ;  I  am  against  a 
prohibitory  law,  on  principle. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  say  that  you  are  opposed  to  law  as  an 
agency  in  this  reform  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  not  opposed  to  law,  but  opposed  to  a  prohibitory  law.  I  am 
in  favor  of  a  license  law. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that  you  relied  on  moral  means  to  effect  the 
remedy '? 

A.    I  rely  upon  moral  means  mainly ;  of  course  I  would  not  exclude  law. 

Q.  You  are  in  favor  of  a  license  law ;  have  you  any  definite  facts  which 
serve  to  convince  you  that*  a  license  law  would  be  useful  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  been  familiar  with  the  operation  of  license  laws  in  this  city 
or  in  other  large  cities  ? 

A.  I  am  not  at  all  familiar  with  the  subject,  but  that  is  my  view  of  the 
matter. 


270  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Have  you  not  heard  that  all  the  license  laws  in  the  large  cities,  have 
failed  to  effect  their  object,  inasmuch  as  they  were  never  enforced  against  the 
unlicensed  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  that  I  have. 

Q.    What  kind  of  a  license  law  would  you  have  ? 

A.  I  have  no  answer  to  give  to  that  question.  I  have  no  views  to  express 
upon  the  subject.  I  leave  the  matter  to  those  to  whom  it  is  committed. 

Q.     What  evidence  have  you  that  intemperance  is  increasing  ? 

A.  I  speak  from  observations  that  I  have  made,  and  from  reports  brought 
to  me  by  those  who  have  visited  the  poor  at  my  suggestion. 

Q.    What  sort  of  moral  means  would  you  use  to  carry  on  this  reformation  ? 

A.     The  preaching  of  the  gospel  is  the  first. 

Q.    I  suppose  that  you  have  other  means  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Example.  I  would  have  every  one  who  desires  a  reform, 
set  an  example  of  temperance. 

Q.  What  is  your  theory  in  regard  to  temperance.  Are  you  theoretically 
in  favor  of  total  abstinence  ? 

A.  No,  I  am  not;  I  am  against  it.  I  have  no  quarrel  with  those  who 
choose  to  abstain,  but  I  claim  that  a  person  maybe  temperate  without  being 
totally  abstinent. 

Q.  Your  memory  runs  back  to  the  time  when  the  temperance  reform  com- 
menced under  Dr.  Beecher  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  we  not  regard  the  example  of  the  clergy  and  of  leading  men,  as  the 
chief  agency  in  promoting  reforms  ? 

A.     Some  do,  I  suppose. 

Q.    Was  not  that  the  general  sentiment  of  the  reformers  ? 

A.  I  am  not  aware  that  it  was.  The  temperance  feform  began  in  New 
York  at  the  time  I  was  a  resident  of  New  York.  It  began  with  the  principle 
of  expediency ;  that  it  was  expedient  for  persons  to  set  the  example  of  abstain- 
ing from  the  use  of  brandy ;  afterwards  it  took  another  shape  and  represented 
that  all  indulgence  in  anything  intoxicating,  in  any  liquor  which  might 
intoxicate  if  used  in  an  intemperate  way,  as  wicked  per  se. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  are  not  in  favor  of  total  abstinence  strictly.  Do  you 
claim  that  the  use  of  intoxicating  drinks  as  a  beverage,  is  a  desirable  thing, — 
that  it  is  a  good  ? 

A.     Every  man  must  judge  for  himself  in  regard  to  that. 

Q.  But  there  is  a  general  principle  about  it.  Do  you  not  admit  that 
there  are  great  evils  resulting  from  its  immoderate  use  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.    Is  there  any  great  good  from  its  moderate  use  ? 

A.  I  think  that  its  moderate  use  is  good  for  some,  and  bad  for  others.  It 
is  altogether  a  question  of  expediency.  What  is  very  good  for  one,  is  often 
very  bad  for  another.  What  is  bad  for  one,  is  often  good  for  another,  and 
necessary. 

Q.  Take  a  particular  case  :  a  gentleman  drinks  a  glass  of  brandy  once 
or  twice  per  week 


APPENDIX.  271 

A.  I  am  not  speaking  of  brandy.  I  object  to  that  altogether,  except  as 
medicine.  I  never  touch  it- 

Q.    You  mean  -wine  and  fermented  liquors,  I  suppose  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  only  fermented  liquors  ?  You  exclude  brandy ;  do  you 
exclude  whiskey,  and  all  other  distilled  spirits  ? 

A.  I  should  object  to  whiskey  except  for  medicinal  purposes.  I  am  speak- 
ing of  wine  and  ale  and  cider. 

Q.  Considering  the  acknowledged  evils  of  intemperance, — for  I  suppose 
that  you  will  admit  that  it  is  one  of  the  very  greatest  evils  that  exist  among  us  ? 

A,    Not  the  very  greatest. 

Q.  But,  considering  the  evils  of  intemperance,  do  you  not  think  that  an 
example  of  total  abstinence  from  all  intoxicating  drinks  as  a  beverage,  on  the 
part  of  clergymen,  on  the  part  of  members  of  the  church,  and  on  the  part  of 
leading  and  influential  citizens,  would  do  a  great  deal  towards  getting  rid  of 
that  evil — and  a  great  deal  more  than  counterbalance  the  good  that  comes 
from  their  use  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  When  you  speak  of  excluding  distilled  liquors,  do 
you  wish  to  be  understood  as  desiring  to  exclude  them  by  legislation,  or  that 
you  would  personally  exclude  them  V 

A.     Personally  I  would  exclude  them. 

Q.  You  do  not  mean  to  be  understood  then  as  qualifying  the  statement 
that  you  would  leave  it  to  each  man  to  judge  for  himself,  whether  he  should 
use  it  or  not  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EEV.  T.  R.  LAMBERT. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  inform  the  Committee 
where  you  reside  ? 

A.    In  Charlestown,  and  have  resided  there  for  eleven  years. 

Q.  From  your  observations  as  to  the  effect  of  the  present  prohibitory  law, 
what  opinion  have  you  formed  as  to  the  value  of  this  law,  as  compared  with 
some  other  system  of  legislation  which  shall  permit  the  sale  of  liquors  under 
certain  restrictions  ? 

A.  In  regard  to  intemperance  my  observation  is  somewhat  limited.  I  do 
not  come  in  contact  much  with  those  who  are  not  members  of  my  church.  I 
have  thought,  however,  for  the  last  few  years,  that  intemperance  has  been  on 
the  increase.  I  judge  so,  not  so  much  from  my  own  experience  as  from  what 
I  see  in  the  papers,  from  what  I  read  of  the  places  of  resort  where  people  go 
and  get  drunk,  and  of  the  troubles  that  arise  in  consequence.  That  is  the 
only  reason  that  I  have  for  thinking  that  intemperance  is  on  an  increase.  In 
regard  to  the  prohibitory  law,  I  know  but  little  about  it.  I  really  did  not 
know  what  it  was  until  I  was  summoned  here.  I  had  never  read  it.  Perhaps 
it  is  inexcusable  for  me  to  say  so,  but  I  did  not  really  know  anything  about  it. 
I  think  that  it  is  contrary  to  the  genius  of  our  institutions.  I  think  that  a 
man's  freedom  and  liberty  is  in  danger  from  it.  I  heard,  in  the  cars,  men 
expressing  their  belief  that  their  liberties  were  invaded  by  the  law ;  that,  in 


272  APPENDIX. 

a  country  like  ours,  they  had  a  right  to  do  as  they  pleased.  I  have  often 
thought  that  moral  suasion  was  the  only  way  to  reach  the  case,  and  I  have 
tried  to  adopt  it  in  all  my  intercourse  with  men.  I  find  that  I  succeed  better 
by  moral  suasion  than  I  do  when  I  threaten.  It  is  an  instinct  of  the  human 
race  to  resist  oppression.  I  think,  therefore,  that  the  prohibitory  law  has  been 
an  injury  to  the  cause  of  temperance  in  the  community.  It  is  the  instinct  of 
the  child  to  resist ;  tell  him  not  to  do  a  thing  and  he  is  very  likely  to  do  it. 

Q.     What  is  your  opinion  of  some  other  law,  not  prohibitory  ? 

A.  I  think,  perhaps,  that  we  ought  to  have  some  law,  and  that  a  license 
Jaw  would  better  promote  the  object  desired.  I  would  favor  the  granting  of 
licenses  to  judicious  men,  who  would  not  abuse  the  privilege.  I  would  restrict 
the  sale  of  liquors  to  certain  places.  I  would  allow  first-class  hotels  to  sell  to 
their  guests,  but  I  wpuld  have  no  open  bar.  I  think  that  the  travelling  public 
sometimes  need  it,  and  that  it  is  also  of  use  in  certain  cases  medicinally.  It 
was  recommended  to  me  six  years  ago  when  I  was  sick,  and  for  a  while  I  took 
whiskey  once  a  day,  and  I  think  that  it  did  me  good. 

Q.  Have  you  any  opinion  as  to  the  effect  of  the  prohibitory  law  in  pre- 
venting the  good  naturally  resulting  from  the  use  of  moral  means  ? 

A.  I  think  that  it  does.  I  think  it  raises  an  opposition  to  those 
means. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  do  not  hesitate  to  give  your  children  com- 
mands, notwithstanding  the  propensity  of  human  nature  to  disobey  ? 

A.  I  do  not  do  it  when  I  can  influence  them  by  other  means  in  which  I 
am  more  successful  than  in  that.  I  never  command  my  children  ;  they  always 
obey  without  commands. 

Q.  Do  you  not,  in  fact,  however,  preserve  the  authority  of  a  parent  and 
apply  it  if  necessary  ? 

A.    I  should  use  it  if  there  was  a  rebellion. 

Q.  Why,  then,  would  you  not  exercise  that  authority  in  a  community  in 
enforcing  criminal  law  ? 

A.  A  man  has  his  liberty,  his  rights ;  a  child  is  under  tutors  and  governors. 
Freedom  of  thought  and  opinion  is  guaranteed  to  all  men  by  the  laws. 

Q.  Why  do  you  speak  of  the  prohibitory  law  as  against  the  genius  of  our 
institutions  ? 

A.     On  the  ground  of  oppression.    I  look  upon  it  as  an  oppressive  law. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  why  you  regard  it  as  an  oppressive 
law? 

A .  I  think  it  assumes  to  exercise  a  power  which  you  have  no  right  to 
exercise  over  your  fellow  men. 

Q.  That  is  only  stating  the  same  things  in  other  words ;  you  do  not  state 
the  principle  ? 

A.    That  is  my  answer  to  the  question. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  you  have  no  reason  to  give  why  such  a  law  is 
oppressive  ? 

A.  I  look  upon  it  in  the  light  of  an  unrighteous  law,  which  you  have  no 
right  to  exercise  over  individuals.  You  might  pass  a  law  for  me  to  do  some 
act  of  which  my  conscience  could  not  approve ;  that  would  not  be  a  proper 
law. 


APPENDIX.  273 

Q.  There  is  no  controversy  as  to  whether  laws  based  upon  falsehood  are 
good  or  not ;  the  question  is,  what  is  there  in  this  particular  law  that  makes  it 
oppressive  ? 

A.  I  think  it  restricts  the  liberty  which  we  all  have.  Why  do  you  not 
pass  a  law  in  regard  to  eating  and  drinking  ?  I  think,  with  many,  there  is  as 
much,  and  often  more,  intemperance  in  eating  than  there  is  in  drinking.  I 
think  the  injury  is  as  great.  Men  may  be  gluttons  at  their  own  table,  and 
thus  injure  themselves  as  greatly  as  by  drinldng. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  evils  resulting  from  over-eating  are  as  great  as 
those  resulting  from  over-drinking  ? 

A.  They  may  not  be  as  great ;  I  do  not  say  they  are,  but  I  say  men  do 
thus  injure  themselves. 

Q.    Eating  is  a  necessity ;  do  you  think  that  the  drinking  of  alcoholic 
liquors  is  a  necessity  ? 
A.    It  may  be  a  necessity. 

Q.     Have  you  ever  read  any  articles  on  the  use  of  alcoholic  drinks  ? 
A.    I  have.    In  my  earlier  days  I  was  the  President  of  a  Temperance 
Society. 

Q.    Were  you  a  total  abstinence  man  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  was  not.     When  it  came  to  that,  I  withdrew  from  it. 
Q.    You  stood  upon  the  ground  of  the  moderate  use  of  alcoholic  liquors  ? 
A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     You  believe  that  to  be  the  proper  ground  ? 
A .     Yes,  sir, — temperance  in  all  things. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  anybody  that  advocates  anything  more  than  the  mod- 
erate use, — I  do  not  say  practise  it,  but  advocate  it  ?  Did  you  ever  know  an 
inebriate  that  did  not  advocate  the  moderate  use  of  alcoholic  liquors  V 

A.  I  suppose  the  inebriate  advocates  drinking  as  much  as  he  pleases ;  he 
does  not  exercise  any  moderation. 

Q.    Moderation  is  the  principle  you  have  laid  down  ? 
A.     And  I  adhere  to  that. 

Q.    Would  you  let  people  drink  as  much  as  they  pleased  ? 
A .    No,  sir ;  I  desire  temperance  in  all  things.     I  believe  that  the  fanatical 
spirit  that  has  been  shown  in  regard  to  the  matter  of  temperance,  has  injured 
the  cause  of  temperance. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  fanaticism  may  attach  to  the  use  of  liquors  as 
well  as  to  an  opposition  to  their  use  ?  Is  there  no  such  a  thing  as  a  fanatical 
adherence  to  alcoholic  beverages  2 

A     I  do  not  think  there  is,  except  with  the  man  who  is  under  its  influence. 
Q.    Is  not  a  man  who  habitually  uses  liquor,  very  likely  to  be  under  its 
influence  at  all  times  ? 
A.    No,  sir;  not  at  all. 

Q.  Which  is  violated  by  the  existing  law  which  you  say  is  oppressive,  the 
right  to  drink,  or  the  right  to  sell,  or  are  both  ? 

A.    I  should  think  either,  the  right  to  drink,  or  the  right  to  sell.     I  think  a 

man  has  a  right  to  drink,  if  he  can  get  it.    But  I  do  not  wish  to  advocate 

drinking.    As  I  said  before,  I  would  have  a  license  law  to  restrict  its  sale,  for 

I  think  that  there  are  persons  who  cannot  govern  themselves.  I  would  intrust 

35 


274  APPENDIX. 

/ 

the  sale  of  liquor  only  to  proper  hands  ;  I  would  limit  it  to  a  few.  I  think 
that  the  sale  should  be  permitted  to  travellers  who  come  here,  and  go  to  our 
first-class  hotels,  who  have  been  accustomed  to  the  use  of  liquor,  or  who, 
perhaps,  are  taking  it  medicinally. 

Q.  Is  the  influence  of  brandy  dependent  upon  the  house  in  which  it  is 
sold,  or  the  hand  that  deals  it  out  ? 

A.  I  would  have  judgment  exercised  as  to  whom  it  should  be  sold.  I 
would  not  have  a  bar  in  a  hotel. 

Q.  But  a  room  in  which  liquor  was  sold  would  accomplish  all  the  purposes 
of  a  bar  ? 

A.  I  would  not  have  a  public  bar,  where  any  one  could  go  in  and  drink^ 
but  I  would  let  guests  have  it  if  they  wanted  it. 

Q.     What  would  constitute  a  "  guest  ?  " 

A.     If  you  go  to  the  Tremont  House  and  put  up,  you  are  a  guest. 

Q.     Suppose  you  go  there  for  a  cigar  ? 

A.     Then  you  are  not  a  guest ;  you  must  have  your  name  upon  the  register. 

Q.    Would  you  have  a  law  defining  who  are  excluded  ? 

A.  If  a  man  should  go  there  merely  for  a  drink,  I  would  not  let  him 
repeat  it ;  I  would  not  let  him  have  it  the  second  time. 

Q.  Which  do  the  more  harm,  the  houses  which  are  called  low,  which  sell 
to  inebriates,  or  the  houses  which  make  men  inebriates  ? 

A .    I  do  not  understand  the  question. 

Q.  Which  do  the  more  harm,  what  are  called  low  groggeries,  which  sell  to 
inebriates,  or  the  houses  which  furnish  all  the  facilities  for  men  who  profess  to 
stand  upon  the  ground  of  moderate  use,  to  become  immoderate  drinkers  ? 

A.     I  think  the  low  houses,  of  course. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  destruction  of  men,  who  are  already  inebriated, 
is  worse  than  the  conversion  of  moderate  users  into  inebriates  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  conclusion  follows  at  all.  1  do  not  think  that  the 
inference  is  a  good  one. 

Q.  Suppose  the  students  of  any  neighboring  institution  should  come  to  one 
of  our  first-class  hotels,  and  perhaps  call  for  supper,  would  you  consider  them 
guests  ? 

A.  I  hardly  know.  I  suppose  in  one  sense  they  would  be  guests.  I  should 
not  consider  them  as  such. 

Q.  Can  you  make  a  law  upon  that  subject  that  would  hit  the  point  you 
have  in  mind  ? 

A-,  Yes.  I  think  a  law  giving  licenses  only  to  people  of  discretion,  people 
whom  you  could  trust,  people  who  would  discriminate  between  those  who 
wanted  to  buy,  would  accomplish  the  object. 

Q.  When  would  you  authorize  a  person  having  a  license  to  refuse  to  sell  a 
glass  of  liquor  ? 

A.  If  the  applicant  was  a  guest  at  a  hotel,  I  do  not  know  that  he  would 
have  any  right  to  refuse  him. 

Q.  Then  you  would  let  the  drinker  be  the  sole  judge,  whether  he  should 
take  an  additional  glass  or  not  ? 

A.  I  would  not  let  him  repeat  it.  If  he  staid  at  the  house,  I  would  not- 
let  him  follow  it  up. 


APPENDIX.  275 

Q.  Suppose  you  sold  to  a  man  in  the  morning,  would  you  not  sell  to  him 
again  in  the  afternoon  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  I  would.  I  say  that  I  would  not  have  a  public  bar 
in  a  hotel  where  men  could  get  drunk.  I  would  only  have  liquor  for  guests. 

Q.  Let  us  not  deceive  ourselves  with  a  phrase.  A  room  in  which  liquor  is 
furnished  to  those  who  call  for  it,  will  accomplish  the  same  thing  as  a  public 
bar.  Would  you  authorize  a  retailer  to  sell  to  a  person  that  he  thought  had 
enough  ? 

A.     Certainly,  I  would. 

Q.    Then  you  would  leave  it  entirely  to  the  discretion  of  the  purchaser  ? 

A.     I  would  not  sell  to  him  but  once  ? 

Q.  You  would  not  sell  him  a  glass  of  liquor  in  the  morning  and  another  in 
the  evening  ? 

A .    It  would  depend  upon  the  individual  wanting  it. 

Q.  Is  the  seller  to  be  the  judge  whether  a  man  can  carry  two  glasses  per 
day  or  not  ? 

A.    That  is  a  risk  that  he  would  have  to  run. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  if  the  clergymen  of  our  cities,  and  other 
well-known  and  influential  men,  were,  as  a  matter  of  sacrifice,  to  stand 
upon  the  ground  of  total  abstinence,  that  they  would  thereby  greatly  promote 
sobriety  in  the  community  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  do  not.  It  would  interfere  with  the  individual  judgment 
and  privilege  that  I  spoke  of  before. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  say  how  your  making  a  sacrifice,  volun- 
tarily, for  the  good  of  your  neighbors,  would  interfere  with  anybody's  private 
rights  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  it  "is  a  sacrifice.  I  do  not  think  that  it  would 
operate  in  that  way. 

Q.    If  it  is  not  a  sacrifice,  so  much  the  more  should  you  abstain. 

A.    If  it  would  be  a  sacrifice,  perhaps  I  should  make  it. 

Q.  But  whether  it  would  be  a  sacrifice  or  not,  would  not  the  sacrifice,  if  it 
be  one,  or  the  abstinence  without  sacrifice,  if  it  be  not  one,  promote  the  good 
of  society  ?  You  say,  that  the  law  would  infringe  the  rights  of  individual 
judgment ;  how  does  it  infringe  the  rights  of  the  people  ? 

A.    I  think  that  I  have  already  answered  that  question. 

Q.  When  you  speak  of  intemperance  being  on  the  increase  in  Charlestown, 
do  you  speak  of  the  circles  in  which  you  move  ? 

A.  I  have  no  knowledge  on  that  subject.  I  spoke  from  what  I  saw  in  the 
papers. 

Q.    You  judge  then  from  newspaper  rumors  ? 

A.  From  what  I  see  in  the  papers,  and  from  what  I  observe  of  drinking 
places  and  saloons. 

Q.    Do  you  often  see  persons  intoxicated  ? 

A.    I  hardly  ever  see  one  intoxicated. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know,  so  far  as  your  own  observation  goes,  a  better  state 
of  things  in  that  respect  ? 


276  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  there  has  been  any  material  change.  If  I  had  not 
been  asked  the  question,  I  do  not  know  that  I  would  have  stated  that  there 
was  a  material  change. 

Q.  You  are  not,  then,  prepared  to  say  that  you  ever  knew  a  better  state 
of  things,  as  regards  temperance,  than  exists  now  in  Charlestown  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  as  I  would  have  made  that  remark,  if  the  question  had 
not  been  asked. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  desirable  to  suppress  the  open  sale  of  liquor  in 
Charlestown  ? 

A .  I  have  already  stated  that  I  did.  I  said  that  I  considered  that  a  proper 
license  law,  under  a  judicious  administration,  would  be  better  than  a  pro- 
hibitory law. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  GEORGE  E.  ELLIS,  D.  D. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  How  long  have  you  been  a  minister  of  the 
gospel  ? 

A.    Twenty-seven  years. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  settled  in  Charlestown  ? 

A.     The  whole  of  that  time. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state,  in  your  own  way,  any  observations 
you  may  have  made,  and  any  opinion  you  may  have  formed,  whether  as  a  minis- 
ter in  charge  of  a  parish,  or  as  a  general  observer  in  society,  of  the  effects 
produced  by  efforts  to  coerce  men  by  legal  measures  into  total  abstinence 
from  spirits  and  fermented  liquors  ? 

A.  I  have  been  inclined  to  the  opinion,  that  all  efforts  to  coerce  men  in 
their  private  habits  only  tend  to  make  them  worse — only  tend  to  make  them 
more  determined  in  asserting  their  rights  and  liberty  (as  they  call  it),  even  to 
their  own  injury.  A  spirit  of  defiance  is  excited  by  attempts  to  coerce.  I 
have  thought  upon  this  subject  in  its  various  relations ;  I  have  had  to  write 
upon  it,  and  to  print  upon  it ;  I  have  had  natural  as  well  as  professional 
means  of  observation ;  there  have  been  those  for  whom  I  felt  more  or  less 
responsibility,  with  whom  I  have  had  to  remonstrate ;  whom  I  have  had  to 
endeavor  to  reform,  and  to  influence  for  good.  The  subject  seems  to  me  beset 
with  a  great  many  difficulties  for  which  legislation  is  not  equal,  and  legislation 
I  think  is  not  the  only  power  to  be  enlisted  in  the  cause.  I  have  read  the 
history  of  our  license  laws,  and  of  the  measures  to  suppress  the  traffic  of 
intemperance,  from  the  first  occupancy  of  this  soil  by  white  men,  and  I  see 
that  with  all  the  efforts  of  the  earnest  and  good  to  suppress  the  use  of  ardent 
spirits,  there  has  been  a  resolute  opposition  running  parallel,  on  the  part  of 
those  who  insist  upon  their  "  liberties  "  and  "  rights."  I  have  been  led  to 
this  general  conviction,  that  the  law  lias  the  right  to  interpose,  and  the  legis- 
lature to  interfere  in  the  matter  of  temperance,  only  when  intemperance  is 
likely  to  entail  wrong  and  evil  on  the  community  in  the  way  of  pauperism  or 
vice.  I  have,  therefore,  thought  that  the  suppression  of  public  bars,  connected 
with  hotels  and  dram-shops,  was  clearly  within  the  province  of  law,  and  that 
the  law  might  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquors,  according  to  the  old  phrase,  "  to 
be  drunk  on  the  premises."  There  are  so  many  legitimate  and  innocent  and 
harmless  uses  of  every  grade  and  kind  of  intoxicating  liquors,  that  individuals 


APPENDIX.  277 

will  assert  their  right  to  purchase  them  without  much  difficulty  or  annoyance. 
I  have  within  the  course  of  the  year  had  two  or  three  cases,  where,  in  my 
professional  rounds,  I  have  found  poor  and  afflicted  persons,  who  are  recom- 
mended by  a  physician  to  use  spirits.  I  do  not  keep  any  in  my  own  house, 
and  I  feel  at  perfect  liberty  to  go  anywhere  I  please  and  buy  any  kind  of 
liquor  that  may  be  needed,  and  carry  it  to  the  needy  and  sick.  And  I  should 
do  this  in  spite  of  any  laws  of  the  Commonwealth  upon  the  subject,  for  I  feel 
that  I  have  a  right  to  do  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONEK.)  You  speak  of  having  read  the  history  of  the 
license  laws  of  this  country.  Does  your  reading  of  history  not  show  you  this 
fact,  that  when  the  authorities  have  granted  licenses  for  the  sale  of  liquors, 
they  either  licensed  so  many  that  there  was  no  restraint  upon  the  traffic,  or 
else  they  failed  to  suppress  the  sale  of  liquors  by  the.  unlicensed  ?  Have  you 
not  observed  that  ? 

A.  I  have  observed  that  the  license  laws,  like  all  others  upon  the  subject, 
are  inoperative  ;  that  where  there  are  masses  of  human  beings,  as  in  cities,  of 
such  mixed  characters  and  nationalities,  that  it  is  utterly  impossible  to  sup- 
press the  sale  of  liquors  ;  but  that  a  license  law  would  be  of  value  in  small 
country  towns,  where  the  majority  of  the  people  were  virtuous  and  correct 
and  self-restraining,  and  where,  without  a  license  law,  it  would  be  possible  for 
any  poor,  miserable  character  to  set  up  a  groggery. 

Q.  Then  you  feel  that  any  license  law  that  you  could  get,  would  be  useful 
only  in  small  communities  ? 

A.  It  would  operate  to  the  best  effect  in  small  communities,  and  would  be 
very  imperfect  in  its  action  in  large  cities,  as  indeed  all  similar  laws  are.  I 
do  not  believe  that  laws  can  suppress  gambling,  or  sensual  vices ;  they  are  in 
the  province  of  morals,  and  law  will  never  be  a  substitute  for  the  God-given 
conscience. 

Q.    Do  you  not  believe  in  laws  to  suppress  gambling,  and  other  vices  ? 

A.  I  do  not  say  that  I  do  not  believe  in  the  wisdom  of  passing  them;  but 
I  say  that  they  are  incompetent  to  suppress  vice. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  man  who  attempts  to  carry  on  reform  exclusively 
by  law  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  not  people  generally  feel  that  law  can  do  nothing  unless  preceded 
by  moral  means  ? 

A.  I  think  that  I  have  met  men  who  relied  upon  law  without  being  willing 
to  use  moral  means.  They  were  so  engaged  in  administering  the  law,  that 
any  moral  influence  that  they  might  otherwise  have  exerted,  would  alienate, 
rather  than  win. 

Q.     Do  you  speak  of  temperance  bodies  acting  in  that  manner  ? 

A.     No,  sir  ;  I  speak  of  individuals. 

Q.  Have  you  not  also  seen  individuals  who  relied  upon  moral  suasion,  and 
who  believed  in  neither  law  nor  gospel,  for  the  reformation  of  the  world  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  ever  did.  I  believe  the  best  influence  is  that 
of  the  family, — home  influence. 

Q.  Everybody  admits  that  that  is  the  best ;  but  the  question  is,  whether 
we  shall  dispense  with  law  because  there  are  two  agencies ; — whether  we  may 
not  make  use  of  more  than  one  agency  ? 


278  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  do  not  understand  the  question  to  be  whether  we  shall  dispense  with 
law  or  not,  but  as  to  what  method  of  law  shall  be  used. 

Q.     I  think  of  moral  agency  as  being  the  best  upon  which  we  could  rely. 

A.  Moral  agencies  are  the  ones  upon  which  we  must  most  rely  ;  for  the 
history  of  license  laws  proves  that  they  have  never  effected  their  purpose  in 
this  respect,  nor  have  prohibitory  laws  for  the  suppression  of  intemperance, 
ever  reached  the  root  of  the  evil. 

Q.  They  never  have  rid  us  from  the  evil  of  intemperance.  Have  laws 
against  the  other  vices  ever  succeeded  in  suppressing  them  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Is  it  not  something  to  have  the  testimony  of  the  law  upon  the  right 
side  ?  Does  law  not  sometimes  go  to  make  public  opinion  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.  Would  you  not  have  law  the  highest  standard  of  morals,  rather  than 
be  accommodated  to  the  existing  condition  of  things  ? 

A.  I  would  have  a  law  passed  as  high  as  the  moral  standard  of  the  com- 
munity would  permit ;  but  I  think  that  any  law  which  is  so  far  beyond  the 
moral  standard  of  the  mass  of  the  community  as  to  be  set  at  defiance  tends  to 
bring  all  law  into  discredit  and  to  weaken  its  force. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  this  law  is  in  advance  of  the  public  sentiment  in  the 
country  towns  ? 

A.  I  very  seldom  go  into  the  country  towns,  and  would  not  undertake  to 
answer  that. 

Q.  What  facts  show  what  public  sentiment  is  ?  For  instance,  we  have 
had  this  prohibitory  law  on  the  statute  book  for  fifteen  years,  and  it  has  every 
year  been  brought  into  politics,  and  has  been  sustained  by  the  people  ;  is  that 
not  an  evidence  that  it  does  express  the  public  sentiment  of  the  community  ? 

A.  If  the  existence  of  the  law  for  fifteen  years  shows  that  it  met  with  the 
approbation  of  legislators,  the  open  defiance  of  it  in  the  community  shows 
that  it  has  not  its  effect  upon  the  majority  of  the  people. 

Q.  Is  the  open  defiance  of  the  law  universal  throughout  the  State,  or  is  it 
limited  to  certain  cities  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  do  not  know  what  you  would  call  defiance  of  it.  For  my 
part,  I  am  willing  to  own  that  within  a  week  I  went  and  purchased  some  wine 
for  an  invalid.  I  did  not  go  to  the  State  nor  to  the  town  agent ;  I  went 
where  I  chose.  If  that  was  a  defiance  of  the  law,  I  felt  perfectly  innocent  in 
doing  it. 

Q.  But  here  is  an  evil  that  produces  three-fourths  of  the  pauperism  and 
crime  in  the  community,  besides  domestic  evils  of  every  possible  kind ;  and 
the  State,  in  its  judgment,  has  passed  a  law  prohibiting  the  sale  of  liquor  for 
drinking  as  a  beverage,  but  providing  a  way  whereby  those  who  need 
ardent  spirits  for  medicinal  purposes,  or  who  need  it  in  the  arts,  can  procure 
them  according  to  law ;  now  allow  me  to  ask  you  whether,  upon  the  whole,  it 
is  not  the  part  of  a  good  citizen  to  conform  to  that  law  ? 

A.  Morally,  I  should  say  that  it  was;  but  I  should  also  say  that  all  that 
the  law  had  to^do  was  to  suppress  intemperance.  I  am,  both  by  precept  and 
example,  opposed  to  everything  like  intemperance,  and  would  not  coun- 
tenance it  in  any  one,  but  I  feel  that  the  law  has  no  right  to  infringe  upon  my 


APPENDIX.  279 

personal  liberty  in  such  a  case  as  that,  as  it  is  neither  a  matter  of  temperance 
or  intemperance. 

Q.  We  all  have  different  opinions  about  that ;  one  man  thinks  that  a  cer- 
tain law  is  an  infringement  upon  his  personal  liberty,  an  unreasonable  and 
unconstitutional  infringement ;  another  thinks  that  it  is  not.  We,  of  course, 
have  to  live  under  the  laws,  and  we  live  under  a  constitution  in  which  our 
rights  are  defined.  Here  is  a  law  which  is  like  almost  all  other  laws  upon  the 
subject  in  one  respect:  it  does,  to  a  certain  extent,  curtail  the  liberties  of  the 
people  ;  all  laws  upon  this  subject  do ;  but,  under  the  constitution,  the  ques- 
tion of  whether  it  does  or  not  violate  the  private  rights  of  individuals,  has  time 
and  time  again  been  brought  before  the  highest  court  of  the  Commonwealth, 
and  it  has  been  decided  over  and  over  again  that  the  law  does  not  infringe  the 
rights  of  the  people,  and  that  the  Legislature  has  a  constitutional  right  to  pass 
such  a  law,  and  to  enforce  it.  Now,  I  ask,  is  it  not  the  part  of  a  good  citizen 
to  bow  to  that  law  ? 

A.  As  a  general  thing  I  should  say  that  it  was,  but  not  without  exception. 
I  understand  that  the  law  allows  an  alternative  to  every  man, — he  can  either 
obey  the  law,  or  suffer  the  penalty  of  its  violation.  In  the  case  of  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Law,  I  made  up  my  mind  that  I  should,  under  no  circumstance,  obey 
the  law,  but  would  take  the  penalty. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  you  were  in  favor  of  a  license  law, 
although  license  laws  have  been  inoperative  ? 

A.  I  think,  as  I  have  said,  that  law  has  the  right  to  interfere  with  the  sale 
of  liquors  where  the  consequences  of  that  sale  entail  burdens  or  risks  upon  the 
community.  If  any  man  has  the  sagacity  and  wisdom  to  discern  and  to  define 
it,  I  think  it  will  be  found  to  mark  the  point  of  legislation. 

Q.  Your  great  feeling  is  in  regard  to  personal  rights.  You  are  in  favor  of 
a  license  law,  but  a  license  which  would  probably  give  to  but  one  man  in  five 
hundred  the  right  to  sell.  Is  that  not  an  infringement  upon  the  personal 
right  of  every  one  who  desires  to  sell  who  does  not  get  that  exclusive 
privilege  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  it  is.  I  did  not  speak  of  any  limits,  within  which  I 
would  confine  a  license  law,  whether  to  one  in  five  hundred,  or  one  in  five 
thousand. 

Q.  Your  license  law  is  supposed  to  give  a  license  to  some  and  to  prohibit 
others  from  selling ;  if  everybody  is  permitted  to  sell  there  is  no  license 
about  it.  A  license  is  a  privilege.  I  want  to  know,  then,  if  a  license  law  is 
not  an  infringement  upon  the  rights  of  those  who  want  a  license  but  cannot 
get  it? 

A.    I  suppose  it  is. 

Q.    Then  a  license  law  is  liable  to  the  same  objection  as  a  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  It  is  liable  to  the  same  difficulty  that  besets  all  legislation  that  attempts 
to  do  by  law  what  is  to  be  done  by  morals. 

Q.  The  question  here  is  between  those  who  are  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory 
law,  and  those  who  are  in  favor  of  a  license  law.  Would  you  dispense  with 
all  law  because  it  is  difficult  to  enforce  ? 

A.  I  would  not  dispense  with  all  laws  against  intemperance,  any  more 
than  I  would  dispense  with  laws  against  gambling  or  sensuality,  but  I  should 


280  APPENDIX. 

not  look  to  the  law  to  do  what  many  of  the  community  expect  from  law ;  men 
expect  too  much  from  the  law. 

TESTIMONY  OF  PROF.  Louis  AGASSIZ. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     How  long  have  you  been  a  resident  of  the 
United  States  ? 

A.     A  little  over  twenty  years. 

Q.     You  are  a  native  of  Switzerland  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     When  did  you  leave  Switzerland,  as  your  home  ? 

A.     At  the  time  I  came  here. 

Q.-    Have  you  since  re-visited  Europe  ? 

A.    In  1859  J  spent  three  months  away  from  Cambridge,  and  in  Europe. 

Q.  As  a  native  and  a  resident  of  Switzerland,  had  you  any  opportunity 
of  observing,  or  any  connection  with  the  culture  of  the  vine  ? 

A.  I  was  born  and  bred  in  a  country  in  which  wine-making  is  the  princi- 
pal branch  of  agriculture. 

Q.  Had  you  an  opportunity  of  observing  the  culture  of  the  vine  and  the 
making  of  wine  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  My  father  owned  extensive  vineyards  as  did  also  my  sisters. 
I  have  seen  the  operation,  just  as  you  see  farming  in  this  country. 

Q.    Was  wine  manufactured  by  the  people  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Every  one  who  owned  a  bit  of  vineyard,  made  his  own 
wine. 

Q.     Had  your  father  a  profession  ? 

A.     He  was  a  clergyman. 

Q.  How  extensive,  and  how  constant,  is  the  use  of  wine,  as  a  beverage, 
among  the  people  of  Switzerland  ? 

A.  It  is  the  usual  beverage.  It  is  a  part  of  the  alimentation  of  the 
country.  It  is  so  completely  a  part  of  the  alimentation  of  the  people,  that 
anybody  who  is  not  able  to  supply  himself  with  it  is  considered  as  a  pauper, 
and  deserves  to  be  supplied  with  it.  Wine  is  given  as  one  of  the  charities 
extended  to  the  poor  of  the  country,  and  the  pauper  who  comes  destitute  to 
the  clergyman's  door  receives  meat  and  wine. 

Q.  Then  it  is  as  much  used  as  any  beverage  is  used  in  any  country,  and 
also  as  the  food  of  the  people  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  observations  did  you  make,  as  a  European,  born,  bred  and 
educated  in  Europe,  of  the  moral  and  physical  effect,  if  any,  produced  upon 
the  people  by  this  alimentative  use  of  wine  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  of  a  more  cheerful  population,  nor  of  a  more  temperate 
and  steady  class  of  people,  than  are  the  peasantry  and  the  citizens  generally 
of  Switzerland.  I  believe  that  the  use  of  the  natural  product  of  the  grape, 
without  the  addition  of  alcohol,  which  is  entirely  unknown  in  wine-making 
countries,  is  one  of  the  conditions  which  secures  that  cheerful  disposition  of 
the  people,  which  is  the  characteristic  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  warmer  part 
of  Europe. 

Q.     Have  your  observations  extended  to  the  neighboring  countries  ? 


APPENDIX.  281 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  spent  eleven  years  as  a'student  in  German  universities  and 
in  France,  and  have  had  opportunities  to  become  familiar  with  the  mode  of 
living,  the  diet  and  the  habits  of  the  people ;  and  I  believe  that  there  is  an 
acknowledged  difference,  which  is  a  characterizing  feature  of  the  population  of 
those  parts  of  Germany  where  the  use  of  beer  is  common,  as  compared  with  those 
parts  of  the  same  country  where  the  use  of  wine  is  common,  and  as  contrasted 
with  those  parts  of  Europe  where  the  use  of  distilled  liquors  takes  the  place  of 
the  ordinary  use  of  wine.  The  peasant  of  Bavaria  lives  upon  beer  and  bread 
and  a  small  quantity  of  meat ;  but  the  principal  food  of  the  inhabitants  of 
Southern  Germany  is  beer  and  bread.  The  effect  of  such  a  diet  is,  perhaps, 
a  greater  disposition  to  dullness  than  is  observed  in  those  countries  where 
wine  is  a  part  of  the  alimentation.  When  I  speak  of  wine  as  a  part  of  the 
alimentation,  I  wish  to  be  understood  that  it  is  actually  so.  There  are 
portions  of  France,  and  some  parts  of  Switzerland  where  bread  and  wine 
constitute  the  food  of  the  people.  In  the  liquor-drinking  parts  of  Europe  we 
find  intemperance,  but  intemperance  is  unknown  in  the  wine-growing  coun- 
tries. It  was  when  I  went  to  England,  for  the  first  time  in  1834,  that  I 
learned  what  drunkenness  was.  In  England  and  in  Northern  Europe  intem- 
perance is  at  home,  but  is  unknown  in  other  parts  of  Europe  where  the  grape 
is  grown.  I  hail  with  joy — for  I  am  a  temperance  man  and  a  friend  of  tem- 
perance— I  hail  with  joy  the  efforts  that  are  being  made  to  raise  wine  in  this 
country,  and  I  wish  them  all  success.  I  believe  that  when  you  can  have 
everywhere  cheap,  pure,  unadulterated  wine,  that  you  will  no  longer  have 
need  of  either  prohibitory  or  license  laws. 

Q.  If  I  understand  you  correctly,  the  use  of  such  wines  does  not  engender 
any  morbid  appetite,  resulting  in  drunkenness  ? 

A .  I  have  never  seen  any  morbid  appetite  engendered  from  the  use  of 
pure  wine,  any  more  than  the  using  of  other  food  engenders  a  morbid  appetite 
for  more  food,  or  for  food  that  is  injurious. 

Q.     As  a  European  born  resident  of  the  United  States 

A.    Not  a  "resident,"  a  citizen. 

Q.  Excuse  me.  As  a  European  born  citizen  of  the  United  States,  has 
your  attention  been  called  to  the  effect  produced  upon  those  who  come  from 
the  old  country  to  this,  by  prohibitory  legislation  ? 

A.  I  will  speak  of  myself  only.  I  was  amazed  to  see  the  manner  in  which 
prohibitory  legislation  here  interferes  with  the  diet  and  mode  of  living  of  the 
people.  Such  an  interference  is  entirely  unknown  to  a  European.  I  think 
that  the  effect  is  an  injurious  one ;  and  I  perceived,  very  early  in  my  residence 
in  the  United  States,  that  there  were  a  great  many  people  who  shared  my 
opinion  and  my  feeling  about  the  use  of  pure  wine,  but  who  were  led  by  the 
pressure  of  the  sentiment  of  the  community  to  publicly  express  opinions  very 
different  from  those  they  really  entertained,  and  who  practised  in  private  what 
they  denounced  in  public. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  considered  whether  this  country  affords  facilities  for  the 
culture  of  the  grape  and  the  production  of  wine,  wherewith  to  meet  the  want 
you  have  described  ? 

A.     I  have  no  doubt  of  it.     In  the  States  of  Ohio,  Missouri  and  California, 
wines  of  excellent  quality  are  now  produced,  and  which,  I  trust,  one  of  these 
36 


282  APPENDIX. 

days  will  be  produced  to  a  sufficient  extent  to  be  exported  abroad,  and 
become  a  profitable  part  not  only  of  our  agriculture  but  of  our  commerce. 

Q.  You  think,  then,  that  the  use  of  the  fruit  of  the  vine  would  tend  to 
the  moral  and  physical  welfare  of  the  people  ? 

A.  I  believe  that  it  would.  I  know  that  in  some  parts  of  Europe,  where 
intemperance  from  the  use  of  distilled  spirits  had  become  very  extensive,  that 
the  remedy  proposed  was  the  production  of  fermented  liquors  at  as  cheap  a 
rate  as  possible,  and  their  distribution  freely  among  the  poorer  classes  by 
incorporated  benevolent  societies.  I  know  that  in  Norway,  in  Sweden  and  in 
Denmark,  the  distribution  at  low  prices  of  good  qualities  of  fermented 
liquors,  under  the  agency  of  temperance  societies,  as  a  remedy  for  intemper- 
ance, was  attempted. 

Q.     With  what  result  ? 

A.  With  very  satisfactory  results.  I  know  it  from  good  sources — from  the 
the  late  physician  to  the  King  of  Sweden  and  from  the  late  Professor  of 
Physiology  in  the  University  of  Copenhagen. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  spoke  of  wine  being  used  as  a  part  of  the  alimen- 
tation in  the  wine-growing  countries  of  Europe  ;  I  desire  to  inquire  whether 
the  alcohol  produced  in  wine  by  fermentation  bears  any  part  whatsoever  in 
the  process  of  alimentation  ? 

A.  I  understand  what  you  alnj  at.  I  will  answer  that  this  question  is 
under  investigation  among  experimental  physiologists,  but  that  the  result  of 
their  investigations  are  contradictory.  I  have  not  myself  worked  in  that 
direction  in  my  scientific  researches,  so  that  I  have  no  positive  information  to 
give,  but  I  believe  that  the  alcohol  which  is  found  by  chemical  analysis  in 
wine  that  has  been  produced  by  fermentation,  is  so  combined  with  the  mass  of 
the  fluid  as  to  form  an  integral  part  of  it.  Hydrogen  is  a  part  of  water,  but 
you  do  not  drink  hydrogen  and  oxygen  when  you  drink  water ;  so  when  you 
drink  wine  you  do  not  drink  a  mixture  of  something  with  alcohol,  but  you 
drink  wine. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say,  as  a  chemist,  that  the  alcohol  is  in  chemical 
combination  in  the  wine  ? 

A.  I  mean  to  say  that  the  alcohol  is  in  such  a  combination  in  the  wine 
that  a  mixture  of  a  certain  amount  of  alcohol  with  water,  even  when  com- 
bined with  sugar  and  flavored  with  other  things,  will  have  a  very  different 
effect  from  the  wine  produced  by  fermentation,  otherwise  wine  could  be 
manufactured  which  would  have  the  seme  effect  as  natural  wine.  But  I  am 
no  chemist,  and  I  do  not  choose  to  answer  chemical  questions. 

Q.  I  desire  you  to  say  whether  the  same  nutritive  elements  may  not  be 
found  in  solid  food,  and  used  in  that  form,  with  all  the  beneficial  effects 
derived  from  the  use  of  wine  ? 

A.  Just  as  much  as  you  might  find  the  nutritive  elements  of  meat  in  any 
preparation  which  the  chemist  might  make,  but  you  would' not,  therefore, 
drive  out  the  use  of  butchered  meat  because  that  is  more  palatable,  more 
easily  obtained  and  more  natural. 

Q.  Have  you,  of  your  own  knowledge,  any  ground  for  denying  the  conclu- 
sions of  the  physiologists  of  France,  in  their  experiments  of  alcohol  taken 
into  the  human  svstem  ? 


APPENDIX.  283 

A.  I  have  told  you  that  I  was  not  a  chemist,  nor  an  experimental  physiolo- 
gist, and  I  am  in  the  habit  of  giving  evidence  in  science  only  upon  those 
things  which  I  know.  I  can,  therefore,  only  answer  you  by  saying  that  I  do 
not  know. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  You  have  been  in  a  great  many  parts  of  the  world, 
and  I  should  like  to  ask  you  if  you  have  ever  been  at  a  hotel  where  you  have 
not  been  able  to  obtain  wine  or  liquor  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    When  was  that  ? 

A.    Last  week. 

Q.     Where? 

A.    In  New  York — at  the  Everett  House. 

Q.     On  what  day  was  that  ? 

A.     On  Sunday. 

Q.    With  that  exception  you  have  been  able  to  obtain  it  ? 

A.  When  I  am  travelling  I  make  it  a  rule  not  to  live  differently  from  the 
people  with  whom  I  am,  so  that,  although  at  home,  I  use  wine  every  day, 
when  I  am  travelling  I  abstain  from  the  use  of  it,  because  I  do  not  want  to 
live  differently  from  the  people  with  whom  I  associate  in  public. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  hotels  except  the  one  in  New  York,  which  you 
have  mentioned,  where  wines  and  liquors  cannot  be  had  ? 

A .  I  do  not ;  but  I  have  not  had  opportunities  of  obtaining  information 
in  regard  to  that  matter. 

Q.  You  have  been  in  a  great  many  of  the  cities  of  this  country,  and  also 
of  England,  France  and  Germany,  and  have  stopped,  I  suppose,  at  first-class 
hotels ;  I  ask  whether  or  not,  so  far  as  your  observation  extends,  guests  at 
hotels  have  facilities  for  obtaining  wines  and  liquors,  if  they  desire  ? 

A.  I  have  never  asked  for  those  things  which  I  knew  were  not  furnished 
legally.  When  I  have  been  out  West  I  have  generally  refrained  from 
inquiry.  I  was  so  occupied  with  my  own  objects  that  I  hardly  ever  made 
inquiries  upon  that  subject.  The  whole  subject  was  an  objectionable  one  to 
me ;  I  have  observed  so  much  duplicity  in  regard  to  the  subject, — so  much 
difference  between  public  profession  and  private  practice,  that  the  whole 
question  has  become  so  unpleasant  that  I  have  generally  abstained  from 
making  any  inquiries. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  McCLELLAN.)  Is  the  wine  obtained  in  this  country  similar 
to  that  obtained  in  European  countries  ? 

A.  You  may  obtain  wines  similar  to  those  used  in  Europe,  but  generally 
they  are  adulterated  by  the  addition  of  alcohol  which  makes  them  very  disa- 
greeable. There  is  a  prevalent  opinion  that  imported  wines,  even  the  lighter 
qualities,  such  as  champagne,  in  order  to  stand  the  voyage,  must  be  mixed 
with  alcohol, -which  makes  them  objectionable.  In  Europe  it  is  the  custom  to 
drink  them  pure. 

Q.    Are  wines  generally  enforced  with  alcohol  ? 

A.  I  believe  they  are,  unless  in  a  private  house  where  a  gentleman 
chooses  to  have  them  as  they  are  manufactured.  That  is  the  way  I  use  them 
myself. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  MINER.)  With  what  classes  have  you  mingled  in  this  country  ? 


284  APPENDIX. 

A.  With  all  classes.  Generally,  when  I  make  an  excursion  it  is  for  the 
purpose  of  lecturing.  I  am  usually  received  by  the  notables  of  a  place,  but 
the  next  day  I  go  to  the  school-houses,  to  see  the  schools  and  the  teachers,  and 
through  them  I  am  brought  in  contact  with  the  parents  and  children. 

Q.  I  will  inquire  of  you  whether  you  find  this  hypocrisy,  which  is  so  dis- 
tasteful to  you,  among  all  classes,  or  among  the  notables  who  receive  you  in 
the  respective  places  ? 

A.  As  I  have  already  stated,  this  subject  is  one  that  I  have  rather  shunned 
than  otherwise. 

Q.  Have  those  people  of  whom  you  have  been  a  guest  for  a  time,  been  so 
unkind  as  to  thrust  their  duplicity  upon  you  ? 

A.  I  have  not  charged  the  community  at  large  with  duplicity,  and  I  do 
not  think  your  question  bears  upon  my  experience.  I  have  observed  here  and 
in  other  kirge  cities,  that  there  is  a  great  difference  between  the  public 
profession  of  men  and  their  private  practice. 

Q.    Is  this  true  of  those  with  whom  you  mingle  in  this  city  and  community  ? 

A.  Of  course  I  cannot  speak  of  those  with  whom  I  do  not  mingle  ;  but  I 
have  mingled  with  men  of  all  classes  here  in  Boston  as  well  as  in  other  parts 
of  the  country.  I  have  not  said  that  all  with  whom  I  meet  are  guilty  of 
duplicity ;  I  would  not  wish  to  be  represented  as  having  said  that  all  the  men 
I  have  met  with  were  guilty  of  duplicity ;  but  I  have  met  with  a  great  many 
people  who,  in  the  matter  of  drinking,  do  not  practise  in  private  what  they 
profess  in  public.  I  will  give  an  incident  that  will  illustrate  what  I  mean. 
Not  long  ago,  a  clergyman  of  the  highest  respectability  told  me  that  he  could 
not  perform  his  duties  without  sustaining  his  system  by  an  occasional  glass  of 
wine ;  and  he  added  that  "  such  was  the  prejudice  of  the  country  that  he  dare 
not  let  it  be  known  for  fear  of  losing  his  influence." 

Q.  I  have  no  doubt  of  the  truth  of  the  illustration.  Such  clergymen  no 
doubt  are  to  be  found. 

A.  The  prejudices  of  the  community  are  so  great,  that  in  self-defenee,  a 
man  in  his  position  cannot  own  up  what  he  does.  I  own  up  to  the  fact  that  I 
drink  wine  every  day. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  ROLLIN  II.  NEALE,  D.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside,  and  what  is  your  calling  ? 

A.    I  reside  in  Boston,  and  am  known  as  a  clergyman. 

Q.     Of  what  church  ? 

A.    The  First  Baptist  Church  of  this  city. 

Q.    How  long  have  you  resided  in  Boston  ? 

A.  I  have  been  pastor  of  that  church  for  thirty  years.  I  have  been  in 
Boston  several  years  longer  than  that. 

Q.  What  observations  have  you  been  able  to  make,  and  to  what  con- 
clusions have  you  come,  as  to  the  effect  of  the  present  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  must  say  that  I  am  obliged  to  accord  with  the  testiniory  that  I  have 
heard,  that  there  seems  to  be  an  increase  in  intemperance,  and  a  strong 
disposition  to  oppose  the  law.  Whether  such  opposition  has  been  owing  to 
the  dislike  of  coercion  or  not,  I  cannot  say,  and  I  cannot  see  that  there  has 
been  much  actual  coercion.  I  am  afraid  that  there  has  not  been.  The 


I 
APPENDIX.  285 

State  Constabulary  is  doing  a  pretty  active  work,  and,  so  far  as  I  can  judge, 
a  successful  one.  I  think  it  very  desirable  that  whatever  laws  are  enacted 
upon  the  subject  should  be  carried  into  effect,  if  possible.  Whether  it  be 
practicable  to  carry  into  effect  the  present  law,  I  do  not  consider  myself 
competent  to  judge.  I  have  conversed  with  different  officers  of  the  City 
Police,  with  the  Mayor,  and  with  men  whose  business  it  was  to  execute  the 
laws,  who  say  that  it  would  be  utterly  impracticable,  and  I  have  no  other 
means  of  forming  an  opinion  than  from  their  remarks  concerning  the  law. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  within  your  own  observation,  how  is  the  cause  of 
temperance  now,  as  compared  with  what  it  was  fifteen  or  twenty  years  ago  ? 

A.  I  should  hope  that  public  opinion  upon  the  subject  of  temperance  had 
risen  to  a  higher  tone,  but  whether  it  has  been  efficient  in  preventing  the 
spread  of  intemperance  or  not,  I  cannot  tell.  I  have  no  doubt  whatever  that 
the  agitation  of  the  subject  has  tended  to  strengthen  the  reform. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion,  formed  from  your  own  observation  in  the 
sphere  of  your  labors,  of  the  comparative  expediency  of  the  present  pro- 
hibitory law,  and  some  law  that  would  permit  the  sale  of  liquors  under  proper 
restrictions  ? 

A*  I  confess  that  I  am  more  ignorant  of  the  law  than  perhaps  I  ought  to 
be,  but  I  have  an  idea  that  as  strong  a  law  as  can  be  carried  into  effect,  is 
desirable.  I  cannot  judge  so  well  as  others  who  have  more  to  do  with  law, 
which  is  best,  but  I  have  no  question,  as  a  clergyman,  (and,  I  think,  an  earnest 
friend  of  temperance  in  every  respect,)  that,  while  the  most  stringent  laws 
that  can  be  enforced  should  be  made,  I  would  have  stringent  laws  regulating 
the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors,  for,  I  suppose,  no  one  goes  in  for  entire  prohi- 
bition. I  am  mistaken  in  the  nature  of  the  prohibitory  law  if  entire  prohibi- 
tion is  its  object. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  of  the  expediency  of  a  law  prohibiting  the  sale 
of  intoxicating  liquors,  wine,  cider  and  beer  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  So  far  as  such  a  law  could  be  carried  into  effect,  I  should  certainly 
favor  it. 

Q.  Have  you  had  occasion  to  travel  abroad,  and  to  notice  the  operations 
of  intemperance  there  ? 

A.  I  have  several  times  been  abroad  in  different  countries  ;  I  have  had 
occasion  to  observe,  as  a  traveller  passing  rapidly  from  one  country  to  another, 
the  habits  of  the  people,  both  in  France  and  in  Germany,  where  in  the  one 
case  they  drink  wine  habitually,  and  in  the  other  beer,  and  in  large  quanti- 
ties, yet  I  scarcely  ever  saw  one  drunk,  though  all  seemed  to  be  under  its 
influence,  and  very  lively.  They  undoubtedly  drank  to  excess,  especially  in 
Germany,  but  there  was  not  so  much  absolute  drunkenness  as  we  see  in  Eng- 
land and  in  this  country.  My  observations,  of  course,  were  limited. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EEV.  THOMAS  WORCESTER,  D.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)    You  are  a  resident  of  Boston  ? 

A.    I  am. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  in  the  Christian  ministry  ? 
A .    I  was  invited  to  settle  in  Boston  in  the  year  1821.  I  accepted  the  invita- 
tion in  May  of  that  year,  and  have  been  in  the  ministry  ever  since. 


286  APPENDIX. 

Q.     Of  what  church  ? 

A.     Of  the  New  Jerusalem  Church  in  Bowdoin  Street. 

Q.  In  your  capacity  as  a  Christian  minister,  and  as  a  general  observer  of 
society,  have  you  ever  formed  any  opinion  as  to  the  value,  the  moral  value,  of 
an  attempt  to  coerce  men  into  temperance  by  legal  restraints  on  the  sale  of 
intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.  I  have  had  an  opinion  upon  the  subject  ever  since  the  attempt  was 
made.  My  opinion  is  that  the  attempt  was  a  mistake,  although  well  meant. 
I  do  not  think  that  the  law  is  calculated  to  have  a  good  tendency.  I  do  not 
think  that  it  really  tends  to  promote  temperance.  It  may,  in  appearance, 
suppress  intemperance ;  it  may  drive  it  into  secret  places,  but  I  do  not  think 
that  it  really  tends  to  suppress  it. 

Q.  As  to  the  question  of  conformity  to  sound  principles  of  morals  and 
of  religion,  as  revealed  to  us  in  the  gospels,  what  is  your  judgment  ? 

A.  It  does  not  seem  to  me,  in  its  mode  of  operation,  to  conform  to  the 
principles  of  the  gospel.  I  know  nothing  in  the  gospels,  either  in  the  New 
Testament  or  in  the  Old,  that  will  countenance  prohibitory  legislation. 

Q.     And  as  a  matter  of  practice,  you  think  that  it  is  working  ill  ? 

A.  As  to  that,  I  have  but  little  knowledge  of  my  own.  My  situation  has 
been  such  that  I  have  had  but  little  personal  observation  upon  the  subject. 
The  most  that  I  know  about  it,  I  have  learned  from  other  people ;  I  hear 
what  they  say,  and  I  read  what  they  print. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  I  understand  you  to  lay  down  the  doctrine 
that  prohibitory  legislation  is  not  in  harmony  with  the  gospel  ? 

A.    I  do  not  think  that  it  is. 

Q.    Do  you  mean  prohibitory  legislation,  as  a  general  principle  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    What  do  you  mean  ? 

A.    I  mean  prohibitory  legislation  in  this  case. 

Q.     Are  there  other  cases  in  which  it  is  in  harmony  ? 

A.  Certainly;  in  my  opinion  there  are  cases  in  which  prohibitory  legis- 
lation is  proper. 

Q.  Will  you  please  state  your  objection  to  prohibitory  legislation  in  this 
case,  as  compared  with  that  in  the  case  of  gambling  ? 

A .  I  do  not  know  whether  I  could  state  it  as  compared  with  gambling. 
Ascending  to  my  own  knowledge,  I  have  no  reason  to  think  that  intoxicating 
liquors  are,  in  themselves,  vices.  I  believe  that  depends  upon  the  use  we 
make  of  them.  I  believe  that  we  are  so  constituted  in  this  life  that  we  may 
have  good  things  presented  to  us  which  we  need  to  use  with  care,  and  which, 
if  not  used  with  care,  may  become  injurious  to  us.  I  believe  that  intoxicating 
liquors  are  among  those  things  that  need  ta  be  used  with  care, — a  great  deal 
of  care.  I  believe  that  some  regulation  in  regard  to  their  use  maybe  needed  ? 
but  what  that  regulation  should  be,  I  have  not  knowledge  enough  of  legisla- 
tion to  say. 

Q.  Can  there  be  any  legislation  upon  the  subject  that  will  not  involve  the 
principle  of  prohibition,— that  will  not  prohibit  somebody  from  selling  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  suppose  not. 


APPENDIX.  287 

Q.  You  would,  then,  have  a  regulation  that  would  prohibit  somebody  from 
selling;  would  not  such  a  law  violate  your  principle  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  think  that  there  should  be  some  regulation  in  the  matter. 
I  do  not  think  that  it  should  be  entirely  free,  like  other  things  that  are  not 
liable  to  be  abused. 

Q.    Where  would  you  draw  the  line  ? 

A .     Perhaps  I  cannot ;  I  would  not  undertake  to  draw  it  strictly. 

Q.  But  your  regulation  would  say  that  certain  persons  might  sell  it  under 
certain  circumstances,  and  that  all  others  should  not  sell  it  ? 

A.     That  is  probably  so. 

Q.  Then,  for  instance,  you  would  prohibit  ninety-nine  out  of  a  hundred, 
and  allow  one  to  sell.  Would  it  not  be  wrong  to  prohibit  the  ninety-nine 
from  doing  that  which  you  would  allow  one  to  do  ? 

A.  I  think  that  it  is  right  to  allow  some  to  sell,  but  wrong  to  allow  every- 
body. 

Q.  You  know  that  our  law  provides,  that  certain  persons  may  sell  it  for 
medicines,  and  for  the  arts  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Can  you  see  a  better  law  than  that  ? 

A.  I  think  so;  I  think  there  ought  to  be  more  liberty.  I  think  that 
people,  generally,  ought  to  have  an  opportunity  to  purchase  it, — to  obtain 
ardent  spirits.  1  think  it  rests  with  them  whether  they  should  abuse  the 
privilege  or  not. 

Q.  I  look  upon  your  doctrine  of  prohibition  as  somewhat  inconsistent.  I 
do  not  sec  how  you  can  prohibit  a  vast  majority  consistently  with  your 
doctrine  of  non-prohibition  ? 

A .  My  principle  of  non-prohibition  is  this  : — that  intoxicating  liquors 
should  not  be  totally  prohibited,  but  I  believe  that  it  is  the  right  of  the  Legis- 
lature to  make  laws  by  which  some  persons  shall  have  the  right  to  sell,  and  by 
which  others  shall  not. 

Q.  Will  you  please  give  me  your  ideas  of  the  practise  of  total  abstinence 
from  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  beverage.  Do  you  believe  in  it  ? 

A.  I  do  not  believe  in  it  as  a  principle.  I  believe  in  it  practically.  It 
has  been  my  practice  nearly  the  whole  of  my  life,  and  I  am  glad  to  have 
other  people  abstain.  I  like  the  notion,  but  I  would  not  take  a  pledge.  I 
would  not  vote  for  a  law  that  would  require  it.  I  would  be  in  freedom. 

Q.  Your  idea  of  the  license  law  would  be  to  put  the  sale  of  liquor  into  the 
hands  of  those  with  whom  it  would  be  safe,  and  prohibit  it  to  all  others  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  that  is,  so  far  as  I  have  formed  any  idea  about  it.  I  know 
out  very  little  about  legislation. 

Q.    You  came  to  Boston  in  1821  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  know  what  laws  were  in  operation  then  ? 

A.  I  really  do  not.  I  should  not  think  any  law  was  in  operation  at  that 
time.  From  my  own  observation  the  evils  of  drunkenness  were  visible  every- 
where. You  could  not  cross  the  Common  any  time  of  the  day  without  seeing 
a  half  dozen  drunken  people  lying  flat  upon  their  backs,  and  you  could  not 
walk  the  streets  without  seeing  drunken  people. 


288  APPENDIX. 

Q.     Is  it  as  bad  as  that  now  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  that  state  of  things  was  under  a  stringent  license 
law? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  do  not.  Perhaps  I  have  known  it,  but  if  I  ever  did,  I  have 
forgotten  it.  If  the  law  was  stringent  in  its  terms,  in  its  execution  it  was  not 
stringent  at  all. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Any  movement  which  you  may  have  observed 
in  the  morals  of  society,  do  you  ascribe  to  law,  or  to  other  influences,  and  if 
to  other  influences,  what  are  they  ? 

A.  I  am  not  sure  but  some  good  has  resulted  from  the  laws  that  have 
been  enacted,  but  I  would  not  recommend  any  of  these  means,  because  I 
think  that  when  we  resort  to  legal  means  the  whole  community  is  apt  to 
neglect  the  better  means. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  In  your  judgment  is  the  existence  of  law  a  barrier 
to  the  use  of  better  and  moral  means  ? 

A.    I  think  that  it  is  to  a  considerable  extent. 

Q.  Still  you  think  those  better  means,  have  in  fact  been  employed  and 
have  been  greatly  successful  in  changing  the  aspect  of  society  ? 

A.  1  have  lamented  the  existence  of  legal  means  all  the  time,  because  I 
have  felt  that  they  were  the  means  of  preventing  the  use  of  other  influences. 

Q.  That  is  not  an  answer  to  the  question.  I  ask  you  whether,  in  fact, 
you  have  not  found  that  moral  means,  notwithstanding  the  law,  have  improved 
the  state  of  society  ? 

A.-  Well,  sir,  I  do  not  know.  I  cannot  say  whether  they  have  in  that 
particular  respect.  I  do  not  think  that  moral  means  t  have  been  used  to  so 
great  an  extent  as  they  would  have  been  if  legal  means  had  not  been  so  rife. 

Q.     But  still  moral  means  have  been  used  to  some  extent  ? 

A.     Certainly,  to  my  knowledge,  they  have  been  used  to  some  extent. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  GEORGE  PUTNAM,  D.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     How  long  have  you  lived  in  Roxbury  ? 

A.     Thirty-seven  years. 

Q.    You  have  always  been  a  clergyman,  and  settled  in  Roxbury  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Wilf  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  whether  you  have  formed  any 
opinion,  in  the  pursuit  of  the  ministry  and  as  an  observer  of  society,  of  the 
effect  produced  by  attempts  to  coerce  men  into  morality  and  temperance  by 
means  of  prohibitory  laws  ?  , 

A.  I  have  not  seen  any  satisfactory  evidence  that  the  attempt  to  suppress 
the  use  of  liquor  is  a  success  or  that  it  is  likely  to  be  a  success.  I  am  not 
aware  that  intemperance  has  been  diminished  of  late.  I  think  there  is  now 
more  of  what  is  called  moderate  drinking  in  the  community,  so  far  as  comes 
under  my  observation,  than  there  was  twenty  or  thirty  years  ago.  The  tem- 
perance movement  at  that  time  had  diminished  the  use  of  intoxicating  drinks 
to  a  considerable  extent.  But  it  was  not  altogether  a  sound  result  that  was 
then  produced.  There  was  a  good  deal  of  the  coercion  of  public  opinion  in 
those  days,  a  great  deal  of  hypocrisy — duplicity,  as  it  has  been  called.  Many 


APPENDIX.  289 

persons  were  urged,  almost  forced  into  signing  the  pledge  of  total  abstinence. 
It  was  made  odious  not  to  favor  the  temperance  movement ;  but  that  move- 
ment did,  I  think,  produce  a  large  diminution  in  drinking.  I  think  there  has 
since  been  a  considerable  reaction  from  that  result.  I  do  not  know  that 
there  is  now  any  more  intemperance  than  then,  but  there  is  more  moderate 
drinking.  I  suppose  that  any  law  to  suppress  it  entirely  not  only  fails,  but,  in 
the  very  nature  of  things,  cannot  succeed,  and  can  only  approximate  to  a 
suppression.  Perhaps  my  conclusions  are  founded  more  upon  what  I  consider 
the  law  of  things  than  upon  any  close  observation,  or  exact  information. 

The  desire,  or  appetite,  or  whatever  you  may  call  it,  for  tonics  of  a  stimu- 
lative nature,  is  so  extensive  in  this  community,  and  in  every  community,  and 
in  all  ages  of  the  world  ;  the  articles  which  supply  that  want  are  so  nearly  a 
product  of  nature,  or  produced  by  very  simple  processes  from  a  great  many 
natural  products ;  then  there  are  so  many  persons  everywhere  who  believe 
that  their  use  is  innocent  and  healthful ;  so  many  persons,  not  merely  those 
who  are  given  over  to  their  appetites,  or  who  are  intemperate,  but  a  great 
many  of  the  best  men  in  the  community,  and  the  best  men  I  know  of,  do 
believe  that  it  is  good  for  them ;  and  at  the  same  time,  there  being  a  great 
interest  in  the  matter  as  a  property  question — all  these  things  lead  me  to  the 
conclusion,  that  even  an  approximate  suppression  of  the  use  of  intoxicating 
liquors,  however  desirable  it  may  be,  can  never  be  attained.  I  suppose 
that  it  is  a  matter  of  fact  to-day  (as  it  has  been  every  day  since  I  was  born, 
and  will  be  every  day  hereafter,)  that  anybody  who  determines  to  have 
liquor  to  drink  will  get  it  somehow,  and  from  somewhere.  That  being  my 
conclusion,  I  next  looked  to  see  whether  its  sale  and  use  could  be  regulated — 
whether  it  could  be  so  regulated  as  to  produce  fewer  of  the  evils  that  result 
in  so  many  cases  from  the  use.  On  that  point,  I  have  no  deBnite  opinion. 
I  am  not  a  legislator.  I  suppose  public  opinion  would  sustain  a  pretty  rigid 
system  of  restriction ;  not  an  attempt  to  prevent  the  sale  altogether,  but  to 
restrict  and  limit  the  sale.  I  have  no  theory  as  to  the  measures  that  should  be 
adopted ;  but  the  more  restrictions  that  public  opinion  will  sustain,  the  better 
But  public  opinion,  I  think,  does  not,  and  never  will  sustain  entire  prohibi- 
tion. A  large  majority  of  the  people  of  the  Commonwealth  might  vote  for 
it,  but  it  is  not  enough  to  have  a  majority  to  enforce  a  criminal  law.  So  long 
as  there  is  a  large  minority, — and  that  minority  includes  some  of  the  wisest, 
and  best,  and  most  respectable  citizens — so  long  will  the  breakers  of  the  law 
feel  that  they  have  somebody  to  support  them.  In  this  case  there  is  not  a 
public  opinion  that  permits  the  suppression.  My  profession  naturally  feel  the 
evils  that  result  from  ineffectual  legislation.  I  believe  that  the  present  law 
produces  a  demoralization,  not  gross  and  obvious  like  that  produced  by  intem- 
perance, but  a  disrespect  for  law  that  cannot  be  enforced.  It  demoralizes 
jurors  and  witnesses.  It  demoralizes  the  sellers  of  liquor,  inducing  them  to 
resort  to  all  manner  of  frauds,  and  evasions,  and  tricks,  to  do  that  unlawfully 
which  they  cannot  do  lawfully.  It  is  injurious  to  the  consciences  of  the  peo- 
ple to  be  always  violating  a  law.  I  am  not  familiar  with  the  courts  of  law, 
but  I  suppose  that  constant  litigation  upon  the  subject  in  the  courts  must 
produce  ill-feeling  and  unkindness. 
37 


290  APPENDIX. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  believe  that  a  license  law,  by  restricting  the 
traffic,  would  diminish  and  restrain  the  evils  of  intemperance  ? 

A.     I  suppose  that  that  would  be  expected. 

Q. '  I  understand  you  to  express  your  opinion  of  the  present  law  more  as  a 
philosophical  deduction  than  as  a  conclusion  drawn  from  actual  facts  that 
have  come  within  your  own  observation  ? 

A.  I  cannot  exclude  either.  I  suppose  that  I  have  some  general  knowl- 
edge of  the  facts  without  any  minute  investigation,  and  I  dare  say  that  my 
investigations  as  to  the  facts  influenced  my  theoretical  conclusions.  I  cannot 
separate  them  entirely. 

Q.     You  live  near  Boston  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.  Have  you  been  accustomed  to  go  around  in  the  country  towns  of 
Massachusetts  and  observe  the  operations  of  the  law  there  ? 

A.     Very  little. 

Q.     Have  you  had  information  that  you  considered  reliable  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  If  you  should  see  in  the  country  towns  this  law  practically  in  effect, 
and  intemperance  driven  out  by  it,  would  you  not  consider  that  a  pretty  good 
effect  ? 

A.  That  is  a  supposition  that  I  cannot  answer.  I  have  not  seen  intemper- 
ance anywhere  suppressed.  I  sometimes  go  into  small  country  towns  in 
Massachusetts,  but  I  am  not  in  the  way  to  see  much  of  the  habits  of  the  people, 
biit  I  am  informed  that  even  in  the  country  those  who  insist  upon  having 
liquor  find  it. 

Q.  "  Those  who  insist  upon  it."  You  have  laid  it  down  as  what  you  sup- 
posed an  acknowledged  fact  that  a  man  who  was  determined  to  have  liquor, 
could  get  it.  Do  you  not  think  that  if  cheap  wines  were  here  where  every- 
body could  get  at  them  handily,  about  everybody  would  drink  ? 

A.  I  think  very  probably  they  would.  I  supposed  that  the  extensive 
drinking  of  wines  did  not  prevail  much  in  climes  so  far  north  ;  but  I  cannot 
say. 

Q.  You  suppose  the  '  people  would  pretty  generally  drink  under  such 
circumstances  ? 

A.     I  suppose  so. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  anybody  who  was  determined  to  have  a  glass  of  pure 
wine? 

A.     I  have  seen  people  who  were  particular  about  it. 

Q.  Is  there  one  man  in  five  hundred  that  is  determined  to  have  a  bottle 
of  pure  wine  ? 

A.     Taking  the  whole  community,  I  suppose  that  there  is  not. 

Q.  Is  not  the  reason  that  they  are  not  determined,  because  they  cannot 
get  it  ? 

A.  I  presume  the  majority  do  not  know  whether  the  wine  they  use  is  pure 
or  not.  They  probably  would  not  know  the  difference  between  the  pure  and 
an  adulterated  article. 

Q.  People  do  not  form  a  determination  to  do  that  which  they  know  it 
impossible  to  do  ? 


APPENDIX.  291 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  And  when  it  is  impossible  to  do  a  thing,  the  determination  is  not 
formed — is  that  not  true  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Then  if  we  can  suppress  the  sale  of  liquor  by  legislation,  people  would 
not  get  it  nor  determine  to  get  it  ? 

A.  Hardly,  supposing  that  to  be  done,  which  I  previously  supposed 
impossible. 

Q.     But  you  can  suppose  both  sides  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  suppose  that  if  it  was  entirely  suppressed,  people  after 
a  while  would  cease  to,  think  anything  about  it. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  in  certain  countries  of  the  world  the  sale  has 
been  suppressed,  and  intoxicating  drinks  excluded  from  the  country  ? 

A .     I  was  not  aware  of  that  fact. 

Q.     Did  you  not  know  that  it  was  done  in  Japan  ? 

A.    I  did  not. 

Q.     Nor  in  Turkey  ?    ' 

A.t    I  did  not. 

Mr.  ANDREW.     They  never  were. 

Mr.  SPOONER.     Do  they  exist  in  Japan  ? 

Mr.  ANDREW.     I  do  not  know. 

Mr.  SPOONER.  I  am  endeavoring  to  show  that  the  determination  to  use 
intoxicating  drinks  would  not  be  formed,  if  it  was  impossible  to  gratify  the 
desire. 

Q.     Have  you  been  accustomed  to  travel  much  in  the  West  ? 

A.    Not  at  all. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  there  is  more  liquor  drank  in  the  Western  States, 
than  in  States  where  they  have  licenses  ? 

A.  I  have  an  idea  that  whiskey  is  more  freely  drank  out  West  then  at  the 
East,  but  I  am  not  acquainted  with  the  facts. 

Q.  You  have  lived  in  Roxbury  nearly  forty  years  ?  You  lived  there  for 
a  while  under  the  operation  of  the  license  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  did  that  license  law  operate  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know;  I  never  had  occasion  to  visit  any  of  the  places  that 
were  licensed,  but  so  far  as  the  drinking  habits  of  the  community  were  con- 
cerned, I  should  never  have  known  that  the  law  had  ever  been  changed. 
There  is  nothing  to  bring  that  law  home  to  me.  I  only  know  that  the  law  is 
changed  by  the  everlasting  jangling  of  the  political  machinery  that  I  hear  in 
every  election  ;  but,  so  far  as  liquor-drinking  is  concerned,  I  should  not  know 
that  there  was  any  change  in  the  law. 

Q.  It  is  claimed  that  a  license  law  will  greatly  restrain  the  sale  of  liquor ; 
I  want  to  know  if  you  remember  when  the  license  law  was  in  existence, 
whether  it  was  enforced  against  the  unlicensed  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know,  sir.  • 

Q.  Is  your  memory  like  Dr.  Worcester's,  as  to  the  amount  of  intemperance 
at  that  time  ?  The  Doctor  said  that  men  were  then  to  be  seen  every  day 
lying  drunk  on  the  Common. 


292  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  have  no  such  distinct  recollection.  Now  and  then  I  see  a  drunken 
man  in  my  walks ;  and  I  do  not  remember  the  time  when  I  did  not. 

Q.  Do  you  see  drunken  men  as  frequently  as  you  did  thirty-five  years 
ago? 

A.  I  am  not  aware  of  any  difference.  My  general  impression  is  that 
there  is  a  difference,  and  a  favorable  difference. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  heard,  or  have  you  any  decided  opinion,  as  to  whether 
the  attempt  had  ever  been  made  to  enforce  this  law  in  the  city  of  Boston, 
until  the  State  Police  took  hold  of  the  matter  ? 

A.    I  only  know  what  I  have  heard. 

Q     What  is  your  opinion  about  it  ? 

A.  That  the  city  authorities  have  believed  it  impossible  to  enforce  the 
law,  and  that  it  has  not  been  enforced.  I  believe  now  that  it  is  enforced  only 
here  and  there.  I  believe  that  when  you  stop  the  sale  in  one  place,  it  breaks 
out  in  another ;  that  where  the  open  sale  is  prevented,  the  secret  sale  will 
take  the  place  of  the  open.  I  suppose  that  while  there  is  a  demand  for  liquor, 
there  will  be  a  supply  in  spite  of  the  law. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  there  are  as  many  selling  now  as  there  were  a  few 
years  ago  ? 

A.     I  have  no  means  of  knowing. 

Q.     Have  you  seen  the  statistics  upon  the  subject  ? 

A.    I  have  not  studied  them  carefully,  and  know  nothing  about  them. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  JOSEPH  TRACY,  D.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.    My  residence  is  in  Beverly  :  my  office  is  in  Boston. 

Q.     What  has  been  your  professional  calling  ? 

A.     I  was  ordained  to  the  ministry  about  1820. 

Q.     What  denomination? 

A.     Congregational. 

Q.     Orthodox  ? 

A.  I  pass  for  orthodox,  always.  I  was  pastor  in  Vermont  for  eight  or  nine 
years.  Then,  called  by  the  authority  of  the  general  convention  of  the  minis- 
ters of  this  State,  I  became  the  editor  of  their  paper. 

Q.    A  religious  paper  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  established  by  their  action.  I  have  been  called  from  one 
thing  to  another  ever  since. 

Q.     How  long  did  you  remain  there  ? 

A.  About  half  a  dozen  years ;  then  I  was  called  by  a  similar  action  to 
Boston  to  take  charge  of  the  "  Boston  Recorder."  Afterwards  I  edited  the 
"  New  York  Observer "  for  a  while ;  and  have  attended  to  various  other 
things. 

Q.  I  would  inquire,  in  view  of  your  observation,  what  conclusion  you  have 
arrived  at  in  regard  to  the  present  system  of  prohibitory  legislation  in  relation 
to  preventing  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.  I  suppose,  sir,  that  all  our  laws  ever  since  my  remembrance,  and  long 
before,  have  been  prohibitory,  properly  speaking,  prohibiting  the  sale  except 
by  certain  persons  designated  by  public  authority  and  regulations  used  by 


APPENDIX.  ;  293 

public  authority  ;  and  I  suppose  that  is  the  case  now.  It  seems  to  me  that  we 
are  victims  of  a  sophism  here,  in  the  sharp  contrast  between  a  prohibitory 
system  and  a  license  system  ;  for  the  license  systems  have  all  been  prohibitory. 
My  impression  is  that  a  system  which  is  prohibitory  to  the  extent  of  prohib- 
iting all  who  are  not  designated  and  authorized  by  the  public  authority  is 
beneficial,  though  if  any  one  chooses  to  say  that  throwing  open  the  sale  to 
everybody  that  chooses  to  sell  is  a  right,  I  could  not  call  him  a  fool,  without 
examination  of  the  question. 

Q.     How  is  it  in  regard  to  the  prohibition  under  the  present  law  ? 

A.  I  cannot  speak  from  my  own  observation  to  any  considerable  extent. 
My  impression  is  that  the  form  of  effort  for  the  promotion  of  temperance  in 
which  I  engaged  about  the  year  1826  or  '27,  was  the  most  efficient  that  there 
has  been.  Perhaps  it  is  from  my  prejudice,  but  I  think  that  those  of  us  who 
engaged  in  it  then,  made  greater  progress,  more  increase  of  effort,  and  better 
efforts  than  have  been  made  since  there  was  a  varying  from  that  course ;  and 
that  there  was  a  great  falling  off  when  that  kind  of  effort,  by  persuading  indi- 
viduals to  be  temperate,  was  superseded  by  calling  everybody  from  that  work 
by  taking  it  into  the  hands  of  the  law.  The  question  I  perceive  has  been 
asked  whether  coercion  by  law  is  better  than  moral  effort.  I  think  it  is  not 
better,  but  it  is  an  excuse  for  neglecting  it ;  and  I  suppose  that  the  various 
improvements  of  the  laws  which  I  have  witnessed,  have  most  of  them  been 
introduced  mainly  in  order  to  get  rid  of  so  much  hard  work,  and  get  the  State 
to  do  it  for  them ;  and  it  has  been  a  great  mistake. 

Q.  Have  you  any  opinion  in  regard  to  the  theory  of  criminal  law  for 
enforcing  moral  conduct,  like  that  which  is  desired  to  be  brought  about  upon 
the  people  who  become  intemperate. 

A.  I  do  not  know  how  I  ought  to  answer  that  question.  I  suppose  tem- 
perance as  enjoined  in  the  Holy  Scriptures,  is  a  voluntary  thing.  The  word 
means  self-control,  and  not  merely  confinement  to  a  certain  course  or  condi- 
i^ion  by  an  external  force.  I  know  that  there  are  occasions  in  which  men 
must  be  confined  by  external  force,  and  that  when  and  how  far  is  a  matter  of 
•legislative  discretion.  It  must  be  done  as  the  public  good  requires,  but  there 
is  no  virtue  in  being  chained  up  in  walls,  or  in  any  other  way  restrained  by  an 
external  force.  The  moral  goodness  consists  in  one's  sustaining  one's  self. 

Q.     Is  there  such  a  thing  as  good  for  the  sake  of  others  ? 

A.  There  is  a  question  for  legislators ;  and  I  have  no  doubt  there  is  a 
necessity  for  it,  so  far  as  it  will  promote  the  public  good ;  but  where  the  State 
is  obliged  to  take  away  the  right  to  do  good  voluntarily,  it  is  a  misfortune. 
The  man  would  be  a  better  man  if  he  would  do  it  without  compulsion. 

Q.  Is  it  at  all  in  your  opinion,  the  tendency  of  such  legislation  to  reform 
men  whom  it  restrains. 

A.  I  cannot  say  that  I  think  it  is.  The  legislation  that  reforms  men  by 
an  external  force  may  keep  them  from  doing  bad  things  when  they  cannot, 
and  that  seems  to  me  to  be  all  the  good ;  the  moment  that  they  get  out  of  its 
reach,  they  are  just  as  bad,  and  more  likely  worse. 

Q.    That  state  of  society  may  be  necessary,  but  does  not  produce  reform  ? 

A.    It  may  restrain  men,  but  does  not  reform. 


294  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Your  opinion  as  to  the  effect  of  this  legislation — I  mean  the  present 
prohibitory  law — as  an  obstacle  or  otherwise  to  the  successful  prosecution  of 
what  you  would  believe  to  be  proper  temperance  measures  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  whether  I  would  say  obstacle ;  if  not,  it  would  be  from 
doubt  about  the  definition  of  the  word  obstacle.  I  think  that  the  present 
course  of  legislation  has  had  the  effect  of  diminishing  the  amount  of  right 
effort.  It  is  what  I  should  expect,  from  the  nature  of  things  and  from  what  I 
have  observed  from  the  beginning.  'It  diminishes,  not  by  putting  obstacles  in 
the  way  of  a  man's  exerting  a  moral  influence  for  the  law,  but  by  promising 
to  supersede  his  efforts  and  relieve  him  from  the  necessity  of  doing  this  duty. 
Most  people  are  glad  to  be  relieved  from  doing  a  laborious  duty,  especially 
one  for  which  they  will  be  laughed  at  and  cursed. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Have  you  observed  what  class  of  men  have  felt 
this  exclusion  from  moral  effort  by  reason  of  the  prohibitory  law,  whether  they 
were  men  in  favor  of  temperance  or  of  moderate  use  ? 

A .  The  term  "  moderate  use  "  is  now  used  for  the  first  time,  and  I  want  to 
make  a  little  explanation.  The  word  temperance  in  the  Bible  is  consistent 
with  moderate  use ;  and,  though  it  may  imply  sometimes  total  abstinence,  it 
does  not  in  this  imply  no  use  at  all.  I  would  say,  that  generally  the  influence 
of  legislation  has  been  to  make  all  men  feel  this  law  a  partial  excuse  from 
moral  effort,  and  that  this  does  not  apply,  so  far  as  I  have  observed,  to  any 
one  class. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  there  were  very  active  temperance  associations 
in  large  numbers,  and  that  uniformly,  without  scarcely  an  individual  excep- 
tion, they  sustain  our  present  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  Certainly ;  I  am  aware  that  the  effort  has  been  turned  very  much  from 
the  moral  effort  to  reform  individuals,  into  something  like  a  political  effort. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware,  for  example,  that  the  Sons  of  Temperance  are 
distinctly  understood  to  exert  their  efforts  to  recover  individuals,  and  yet  that 
they  are  individually  and  collectively  in  favor  of  the  present  law  ? 

A .  I  have  heard  of  their  efforts  to  recover  individuals ;  but  I  am  not  posted 
as  to  the  statistics. 

Q.     Then  you  are  aware  that  there  are  bodies  similar  to  the  Sons  of  Tem- 
perance who  have  distinguished  themselves  for  moral  efforts  ? 
•  A.     I   do   not  say  "distinguished."     I  think   that  I  should  myself  very 
much  doubt  whether,  by  taking  the  whole  thing  into  their  hands  and  excusing 
everybody,  they  do  not  do  more  hurt  than  good. 

Q.  How  does  it  follow  that,  because  a  body  of  men  associate  themselves 
together,  they  thereby  excuse  you  or  anybody  else  ? 

A.     It  follows  from  the  perverseness  of  the  human  mind. 

Q.     Then  it  applies  equally  to  moral  efforts,  does  it  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  what  efforts  they  have  used,  whether  moral  or  economi- 
cal. I  have  heard  something  of  their  attempting  to  support  their  members 
when  they  are  sick.  I  do  not  know  that  the  effort  has  been  a  moral  effort. 

Q.  What  right  have  any  class  of  gentlemen,  and  especially  of  clergymen, 
on  the  enactment  of  a  prohibitory  law  by  other  people,  to  say  that  they  are 
therefore  excused.  If  you  believe  that  moral  effort  is  the  true  mode  of  labor, 
what  right  have  you  to  excuse  yourself  ? 


APPENDIX.  295 

A .  No  right  at  all,  unless  I  see  that  circumstances  are  so  changed  by  the 
law  as  to  render  my  labors  useless,  or  at  least  less  useful. 

Q.  Have  your  efforts  been  based  on  total  abstinence  in  your  labors  thus 
far? 

A.-  Yes,  sir;  total  abstinence,  as  a  beverage,  and  for  purposes  of  convivi- 
ality. 

Q.     Are  there  any  places  for  open  sale  of  liquor  in  Beverly  ? 

A.     I  think  not. 

Q.  Has  there  been,  at  any  time,  an  application  of  the  law  in  removing 
any  person  that  had  entered  upon  the  sale  there  ? 

A.  I  think,  within  a  few  months,  there  has  been  a  case  of  an  Irish  woman, 
near  the  boundary  of  Salem,  whose  liquors  were  taken  and  carried  off.  There 
was  one  place  where  it  was  reported  that  liquors  could  be  had,  and  then  it 
was  reported  that  the  man  had  been  threatened  and  had  quit.  I  do  not  know 
how  it  was. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  would  have  been  better  to  have  allowed  the  man  to 
set  up  his  shop,  and  then  to  have  plied  him  with  moral  suasion  ?  Which  is 
better,  to  rely  on  moral  suasion  alone  or  to  make  short  work  of  it  ? 

-A.     If  it  was  left  to  me,  I  should  apply  the  law  and  shut  him  up. 

Q.  In  view  of  the  existing  facts  in  the  city  of  Boston  in  the  regular  busi- 
ness traffic,  and  under  an  influence  too  strong  to  be  counterbalanced  by  any 
influence  of  moral  effort  reasonably  to  be  expected  in  such  a  cbmmunity 
without  the  aid  of  law,  would  you  not  rely  upon  law  ? 

A .  I  suppose  so ;  and  therefore  I  said  in  the  beginning  of  my  examina- 
tion that  I  would  have  selling  prohibited,  except  to  persons  authorized  by  the 
State,  who  should  sell  under  regulations. 

Q.    You  are  a  total  abstainer  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Would  you  have  them  sell  for  purposes  not  conformable  to  the  prin- 
ciples deduced  from  the  influence  of  liquors  as  a  beverage  upon  people  in 
general  ?  That  is,  being  a  total  abstainer  from  principle,  would  you  have  the 
State  authorize  their  sale  as  a  beverage  ? 

•A.  There  is  a  very  considerable  difficulty  there.  I  would  not,  as  that 
would  be  understood.  There  is  a  difficulty  there,  in  the  State's  authorizing 
the  sale  by  persons  who  shall  determine  what  the  purpose  of  a  particular  sale 
is.  I  would  say  that  if  it  were  uncertain,  in  any  particular  case,  it  would  be 
well  to  stop  the  sale. 

Q.     However,  as  a  beverage,  you  would  pronounce  it  improper  ? 

A.  I  should ;  but  still  I  do  not  know  that  I  should  not  allow  the  buyer  to 
be  very  much  his  own  judge  as  to  whether  he  needed  it  or  not. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  ALFRED  MACY. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     What  is  your  residence  ? 

A .  Nan  tucket. 

Q.  You  are  a  member  of  the  bar  ? 

A.  I  am,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  an  officer  of  the  town  ? 

A.  Not  at  the  present  time. 


296  APPENDIX. 

Q.     You  were  formerly  Collector  of  the  port  ? 

A.     I  was,  until  last.  October. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  the  preparation  and  sending  to  the  General  Court  of 
a  petition  from  the  Island  of  Nantuckct  in  favor  of  a  license  law? 

A.  I  was  called  upon  and  asked  to  sign,  and  did  sign,  such  a  petition.  I 
had  nothing  to  do,  however,  with  its  circulation,  and  have  had  but  little 
knowledge  in  reference  to  its  circulation ;  but  I  have  been  informed  by  many 
of  those  persons,  and  I  know  that  many  of  them  are  men  regarded  as  first- 
class  in  our  community. 

Q.  Is  it  your  opinion,  then,  as  a  matter  of  observation  and  theory  that 
some  such  legislation  would  be  favorable  ? 

A.  I  should  say  that  some  such  legislation  would  be  desirable.  I  would 
not,  however,  restrict  the  present  prohibitory*  law,  but  I  would  engraft  upon 
that  a  license  law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Would  it  not  reverse,  practically,  the  operation 
of  the  present  law  ? 

A.  It  would,  to  a  certain  extent,  reverse  it ;  but  I  would  retain  the  pro- 
visions of  the  prohibitory  law,  for  the  purpose  of  checking  the  illegal  sale  of 
intoxicating  liquors.  I  would  have  a  license  law,  but  I  would  have  that 
license  law  so  framed  that  the  city  or  town  authorities  might  control  the 
matter,  each  in  their  own  town  or  city  ;  and  then  I  would  retain  the  provisions 
of  the  present  prohibitory  law,  and  enable  them  to  control  the  matter,  each 
in  their  own  towns. 

Q.     Is  this  view  based  on  any  difficulty  in  executing  the  present  law  ? 

A.  None  at  all.  There  is  no  difficulty  in  executing  the  prohibitory  law 
in  Nantucket,  except  that  there  is  a  strong  feeling  in  the  community  against 
the  present  law ;  but  whenever  an  attempt  has  been  made  to  execute  it,  it 
has  been  successful ;  there  are  few  attempts  made. 

Q.     Is  there  much  open  sale  in  Nantucket  ? 

A.  There  are  several  places ;  there  is  no  difficulty  in  obtaining  it;  but 
there  is  a  feeling  in  opposition  to  the  present  prohibitory  law,  in  many  of  its 
provisions.  There  is  an  objection  to  the  agencies.  People  find  a  difficulty  in 
procuring  pure  liquor  at  the  town  agency,  not  only  in  Nantucket,  but  I  know 
that  it  is  so  in  other  places :  and  not  only  that  they  find  at  the  town  agencies 
miserably  poor  liquors,  but  that  they  are  compelled  to  pay  enormously  large 
prices  for  them.  I  myself  sent  to  the  town  agency  in  Hyannis  ;  I  was  detained 
by  the  storm  in  getting  home  by  the  steamer,  and  I  sent  for  a  pint  of  whiskey. 
The  article  I  got  was  nearly  the  color  of  this  table,  and  they  charged  a  dollar 
for  it.  The  liquor  I  wanted  for  medicinal  purposes.  I  am  not  in  the  habit  of 
using  the  article  as  a  beverage. 

Q.    Was  that  bought  of  the  State  Agent  ? 

A.    It  was  bought  of  the  town  agent. 

Q.     Was  that  bought  by  him  of  the  State  Agent  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  as  to  that ;  I  only  know  that  it  is  required  to  be  bought 
of  the  State  Agent. 

Q.  Your  opinion  is  based  on  the  general  utility  of  liquors  as  a  beverage, 
is  it  not  ? 

A.    No,  sir.    By  no  means.    I  do  not  recommend  them  as  a  beverage. 


APPENDIX.  297 

Q.     On  what  basis  do  you  recommend  a  license  law  ? 

A.  I  think  a  prohibitory  law  can  be  executed;  but  I  do  not  think  the 
execution  of  the  prohibitory  law  checks  intemperance.  I  know  that  intem- 
perance has  increased,  and  the  moderate  use  of  spirits  in  Nantucket  has 
increased  very  much  of  late.  I  know  that  twenty-five  years  ago  there  was  a 
strong  feeling  in  favor  of  temperance ;  and  there  were  even  a  number  of  cold 
water  societies  among  the  children  ;  and  no  man  would  presume  to  use  any 
ardent  spirits  publicly. 

Q.     Are  there  children  at  present  among  the  drunkards  in  Nantucket  ? 

A.  I  think  the  children  are  growing  into  the  use  of  liquor.  I  think  that 
the  young  men  in  that  community  are  many  of  them  addicted  to  it. 

Q.  Take  the  children  among  the  cold  water  societies,  are  they  using 
liquor  ? 

A.  By  no  means.  I  think  there  was  probably  a  greater  aversion  to  the 
use  of  liquor  at  that  time  of  which  I  spoke  than  there  is  now,  for  the  reason 
that  there  was  more  said  on  the  subject  of  temperance  at  that  time,  and  a 
stronger  feeling  on  the  question  than  there  is  at  the  present  time. 

Q.  You  do  not  think  that  the  prohibition  of  the  traffic  in  Nantucket  can 
be  carried  to  the  extent  that  liquors  will  not  be  had,  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.     No,  sir,  I  do  not. 

Q.     You  do  not  think  that  the  liquor-shops  can  be  closed  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  public  sale  of  liquors  can  be  done  away  with.  I  think 
it  has  been. 

Q.     How  was  that  accomplished  ? 

A.  Notice  was  given  to  the  different  places  of  business,  and  they  quietly 
closed. 

Q.     Do  you  recollect  any  time  when  moral  suasion  did  such  a  thing  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  as  I  do.  I  recollect  that  ten  or  twelve  years  ago  I,  with 
several  other  persons,  called  on  several  dealers  and  tried  to  induce  them  to 
give  up  the  traffic ;  and  we  found  that  many  of  them  were  willing  to  give  up 
if  the  others  would,  but  others  said  that  they  knew  that,  if  they  did  not  sell 
it,  people  would  have  it,  and  therefore  they  were  disposed  to  continue  their 
business. 

Q.  Would  not  a  license  law  that  would  license  that  part  that  would  not 
give  up,  influence  those  to  continue  the  sale  who  were  willing  to  give  up  ? 

A.  I  think  not.  I  think  that  if  a  stringent  license  law  were  passed  it 
would  be  very  natural  for  those  who  received  a  license  to  look  out  for  those 
who  sold  without  licenses,  and  they  would  be  very  likely  to  know  if  there 
was  illegal  sale. 

Q.  You  think  that  if  there  was  a  license  law  added  to  the  present  prohibi- 
tory law,  there  would  be  no  cases  of  private  sale,  except  to  a  limited  extent, 
and  people  wanting  it  would  get  it  at  the  licensed  places  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  That  would  not  follow.  Many  of  them  would  not  go  to  the 
licensed  places.  I  would  have  the  law  so  rigid  that  no  man  who  has  made  a 
bad  use  of  liquors  should  get  it ;  and  so  that  a  man  who  has  abused  his  family 
by  reason  of  the  use  of  it,  should  not  have  it.  I  would  have  a  law  so  framed 
that  such  men  could  not  buy  it. 
33 


298  APPENDIX. 

Q.     You  would  have  no  measure  to  affect  moderate  drinking  ? 

A.    I  would  not  have  it  drank  on  the  premises  where  it  was  bought  ? 

Q.  JBut  you  would  have  the  seller  deal  out  liquor  freely,  and  any  man, 
however  immoderately  he  drank,  provided  he  did  not  become  intoxicated, 
should  have  an  opportunity  of  getting  it  ? 

A.  I  have  not  thought  of  the  matter  sufficiently  to  frame  a  license  law  in 
all  its  details ;  but  I  think  I  would  not  have  any  persons  appointed,  as,  for 
instance,  those  who  were  known  by  the  selectmen  of  the  towns  to  be  improper 
persons. 

Q.  Would  there  not  be  clearly  an  increased  difficulty  in  applying  the  law, 
when  you  must  discriminate  as  to  the  measure  of  inebriety,  which  does  not  exist 
now? 

A.  I  do  not  see  why  there  should  be  any  difficulty.  I  think  that  a  judicious 
Board  of  Selectmen  in  the  different  towns  would  have  an  opportunity  of 
knowing  the  individuals  who  were  licensed. 

Q.  But  the  difficulty  is  in  restraining  the  dealer  from  selling  to  the  man 
who  is  drinking  immoderately. 

A.  I  would  have  the  dealer  expressly  prohibited  by  the  selectmen  from 
selling  to  certain  persons  ;  and  I  would  have  a  license  law  so  framed  that  this 
prohibition  on  the  part  of  the  selectmen  should  be  strictly  enforced  upon  the 
dealer. 

Q.  Will  you  state  the  class  to  whom  you  would  not  permit  the  agent  to 
sell? 

A.  I  would  not  permit  him  to  sell  to  any  person  who  was  in  the  habit  of 
making  what  is  called  an  improper  use  of  liquors,  nor  to  a  person  who  is  in 
the  habit  of  getting  intoxicated,  or  who  neglects  his  family.  I  am,  myself,  in 
favor  of  total  abstinence  from  all  intoxicating  drinks  as  beverages ;  but  I  am 
not,  myself,  disposed  to  enforce  my  own  peculiar  views  in  that  matter  upon 
my  friends.  I  have  warm  personal  friends  who  are  addicted  to  the  use  of 
ardent  spirits,  and  I  think  just  as  much  of  them  as  I  should  if  they  were  not. 

Q.     What  provision  would  you  make  for  your  friends  ? 

A.     I  presume  that  if  they  wanted  liquor  they  would  get  it  somewhere. 

Q.     Would  it  not  be  the  same  under  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  think  that  in  our  case,  iii  Nantucket,  that  these  places  that  we  were 
trying  to  get  closed  were  places  where  liquor  was  drank  on  the  premises. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  it  required  such  a  vigorous  effort  to  put  down  the 
traffic  ?  Could  not  the  State  Constabulary  have  accomplished  it  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  the  constabulary  could  have  accomplished  it  any  time — that  is 
to  say,  the  public  sale.  There  were  no  prosecutions  at  that  time ;  but  there  has 
been  a  strong  feeling  against  the  law,  and  against  the  State  Constabulary, 
since  that  time  in  Nantucket.  I  am  acquainted  with  three  State  Constables, 
and  they  are  all  three  accustomed  to  the  use  of  ardent  spirits. 

Q.     Why  do  you  not  report  them  ? 

A.     I  do  not  consider  it  my  special  duty  to  report  them. 

Q.     When  were  they  appointed  ? 

A.  The  first  was  appointed  in  February  last.  Previous  to  that  there  had 
been  some  one  appointed  at  Martha's  Vineyard. 


APPENDIX.  299 

Q.     So  far  as  you  have  observed  the  State  Constabulary,  compare  last  year 
with  the  previous  year  ?    What  should  you  say  of  their  character  ? 
A.    I  know  nothing  of  them. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  FRANCIS  B.  FAY. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     Your  home  is  in  Lancaster,  is  it  not  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Were  you  born  there  ? 

A.     I  was  born  at  Southborough.  • 

Q.  You  used  to  live  in  Chelsea  at  one  time  and  do  business  in  Boston,  did 
you  not '? 

A.     Yes,  sir  ;  for  some  twenty-five  years. 

Q.     When  did  you  live  in  Chelsea? 

A.     Seven  years  ago. 

A .     At  one  time  you  were  Mayor  of  Chelsea  ? 

A.     I  was. 

Q.     The  first  mayor  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     And  your  place  of  business  was  in  Boston  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q."  Have  you  had  any  and  what  connection  with  the  charitable  institutions 
of  the  Commonwealth  ? 

A.  I  have  been  connected  with  the  School  for  Girls  at  Lancaster,  as  trustee 
and  as  treasurer. 

Q.  In  your  capacity  as  a  citizen,  and  in  these  various  duties,  have  you 
availed  yourself  of  the  opportunities  of  observing  the  operation  of  the  pro- 
hibitory laws  against  the  traffic  in  ardent  spirits  ?  If  you  have  formed  any 
opinions,  I  wish  you  would  be  kind  enough'  to  state  them  to  the  Committee  in 
your  own  way  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt,  sir,  whatever  the  intention  may  be,  and  whatever 
effect  it  was  expected  to  have  upon  the  use  of  ardent  spirits,  I  have  no  doubt 
that  the  law,  or  any  other  of  that  description,  has  an  immoral  tendency  upon 
society,  because  it  tends  to  deceit,  to  falsehood,  to  resentment,  and  to  all  the 
other  evils  that  grow  up  in  the  minds  of  men  against  dictation.  I  $o  not 
doubt  the  intention,  the  design,  the  object  of  the  framers  or  projectors  of  the 
law.  I  have  ever  been  a  temperance  man,  and  I  have  never  had  any  taste 
or  desire  for  liquors.  But,  sir,  I  do  not  arrive  at  hasty  conclusions.  From 
my  reading  and  from  my  reflections  and  observations,  I  have  come  to  this  con- 
clusion, without  any  hesitation,  that  nothing  are  people  so  ready  to  combat, 
that  there  is  nothing  upon  which  their  minds  will  rest  almost  exclusively,  as 
that  of  prohibiting  them  from  doing  what  their  wishes,  consistent  with  the 
common  order  of  society,  will  justify.  And  I  believe,  sir,  that  this  has  been 
the  case  from  Adam  down  to  the  present  time,  that  nothing  induces  us  so 
much  as  to  dictate,  and  that  there  is  nothing  which  will  so  soon  resist.  In 
saying  what  I  have,  sir,  I  have  never  opposed  any  measures  which  have  been 
brought  forward  to  promote  the  cause  of  temperance.  I  desire  temperance 
to  be  universal ;  but  my  experience  and  observation  lead  me  to  believe  that 
the  hope  can  never  be  realized  until  the  millenium ;  that  the  appetites  of 


300  APPENDIX. 

men  cannot  be  controlled  completely ;  and  therefore  I  have  never  signed  an)' 
petition  for  a  license  law,  and  have  never  signed  any  remonstrance.  I  have 
said  to  the  friends  of  the  license  law,  and  to  the  friends  of  the  prohibitory 
law,  I  bid  you  God-speed ;  if  you  can  succeed,  I  should  rejoice.  But  not 
having  any  faith  in  the  ultimate,  I  cannot  labor  for  naught. 

Q.  How  far  do  you  think,  practically,  this  legislation  has  been  of  service 
in  the  prevention  of  drunkenness,  or  of  the  evils  that  flow  from  it,  among  the 
classes  of  poor  for  whom  you  have  labored  ? 

A.  I  am  not  aware,  sir,  of  any  material  change.  I  have  witnessed  some 
cases  where  gentlemen  were  naturally  temperate  to  a  certain  extent,  per- 
haps as  temperate  as  most  people  are,  who  would  call  for  liquor  and  drink  it, 
to  show  their  independence ;  not  because  they  wanted  it,  but  because  they 
were  determined  "not  to  be  oppressed,"  as  they  said.  Whether  it  was 
oppression  or  not,  it  is  not  for  me  say ;  but  they  considered  it  so.  Therefore 
I  say,  that  there  are  some  cases,  which  have  come  to  my  knowledge,  where 
the  use  of  liquor  has  increased.  In  my  own  neighborhood,  at  present,  I 
cannot  say.  I  have  been  there  but  seven  years.  But  one  thing  is  certain : 
we  have  no  places  in  town  where  liquor  is  sold,  or  known  to  be  sold,  except 
the  town  agency,  and  yet,  no  man  can  walk  the  streets  there  scarcely  a  day 
in  the  year  without  seeing  men  intoxicated.  Where  they  get  their  liquor,  is 
unbeknown  to  me.  I  saw  one  yesterday.  I  was  at  work  upon  an  aqueduct 
that  I  own,  which  had  broke  loose,  and  a  man  rode  by  who  was  only  just  able  to 
guide  his  horse.  Another,  a  few  months  ago,  was  found  at  the  corner  of  the 
road  in  the  morning,  dead  drunk.  Another  was  passing  within  less  than  a 
mile  of  my  house,  with  a  load  of  wood,  drunk,  and  fell  off  from  his  wagon,  and 
the  wagon  went  over  him  and  killed  him.  Therefore,  there  is  liquor  there 
somewhere,  or  they  obtain  it  from  some  source.  Our  liquor  agent  is  our 
nearest  neighbor.  His  shop  joins  my  door-yard.  But  I  have  no  idea  that  he 
sells  liquor  without  complying  with  the  provisions  of  the  law.  He  is  deacon 
of  one  of  our  churches.  He  is  as  pure  a  man  as  there  is  in  our  town  ;  they 
cannot  get  liquor  there.  Where  they  get  it,  is  more  than  I  know. 

Q.  Have  you  any  hope  in  producing  any  moral  improvement  in  society  by 
declaring  war  against  the  material  itself,  instead  of  endeavoring  to  educate 
the  taste  and  opinions  of  the  community  ? 

A.  I  have  no  confidence  that  liquor  will  ever  become  entirely  eradicated 
from  the  community.  I  think  that  any  one  who  studies  human  nature,  and 
takes  mankind  as  they  are,  and  not  as  he  would  wish  them  to  be,  will  be  very 
likely,  if  he  is  not  prejudiced,  to  arrive  at  that  conclusion. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  speak  of  the  condition  of  things  in  Lan- 
caster, and  say  that  there  is  no  sale  that  is  known.  Would  it  be  an  improve- 
ment to  license  men  to  sell  there  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.     Well,  sir,  my  impression  is,  that  it  would. 

Q.     How  so  ?     Your  liquor  agent,  you  say,  is  a  faithful  man  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir  ;  I  do  not  understand  that  he  sells  for  a  beverage. 

Q.    Is  it  worth  the  while  to  supply  people  legally  for  a  beverage  ? 

A.  If  such  liquor  law  as  I  have  planned  in  my  own  estimation  substantially 
were  passed,  it  would  remove  in  the  first  place  the  opposition  on  the  part  of 
a  large  class  of  people — for  there  is  a  feeling  of  opposition  in  human  nature  to 


APPENDIX.  301 

dictation.  It  would  regulate  and  limit  the  seller  in  the  manner  in  which  he 
sold,  and  in  the  persons  to  whom  he  sold. 

Q.    But  do  you  wish  it  sold  at  all  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.    1  wish  it  sold  as  a  beverage  in  order  to  quiet  the  community. 

Q.  It  might  remove  the  opposition  to  the  present  prohibitory  law,  but 
would  there  not  spring  up  a  stronger  opposition  to  the  license  law  ?  Would 
there  not  spring  up  a  strong  feeling  against  the  license  law  ? 

A .  I  think  not  very.  Forty  years  ago  there  were  a  great  many  licenses 
made,  and  there  was  no  opposition.  , 

Q.  But  were  not  people  almost  all  drinkers,  forty  years  ago,  without 
exception  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  there  were  exceptions  ;  for  I  did  not  drink  myself. 

Q.    You  know  there  have  been  very  great  changes  in  that  respect  ? 

A.    Yas,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  if  the  great  majority  of  the  people  think  it  ought  not  to  be  sold, 
and  think  it  is  morally  wrong  to  license  men  to  sell,  would  you  not  create  an 
opposition  to  that  law  which  would  go  into  politics  directly  ? 

A.     It  goes  into  politics  now. 

Q.     Would  it  not  go  into  politics  more  decidedly  than  it  does  now  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  as  to  that ;  it  is  a  matter  of  theory.  I  take  this  ground: 
the  present  law  is  not,  and,  in  my  opinion,  cannot  be  practically  observed. 

Q.     But  it  is  active  ? 

A.     But  the  men  are  intemperate. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  liquor  was  not  sold  in  Lancaster,  but  that 
it  was  drank  considerably  ? 

A.  We  do  not  know  where  it  is  sold ;  but  we  have  strong  impressions  as 
to  where  they  get  it.  I  think  that  no  man  ever  was,  or  ever  will  be  made 
moral,  virtuous  and  religious  by  law. 

Q.  Does  not  that  help  ?  Do  not  laws  against  criminality  serve  to  improve 
the  morals  of  a  community  ? 

A.  My  impression  is,  that  moral  principle  should  be  engrafted  into  a  law. 
When  a  person  is  convinced,  or  in  fact  reformed,  he  needs  no  law.  Therefore, 
I  say,  that  the  law  has  very  little  to  do  with  reformation. 

Q.     Do  you  go  against  all  laws  ? 

A.    I  go  against  all  laws  that  cannot  be  enforced. 

Q.    I  understood  you  that  the  law  was  enforced  in  Lancaster  ? 

A.     We  ai'e  all  moral  people  there. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  ask  as  to  the  habits  of  your  people,  forty-five  years  ago. 
Was  there  much  liquor  drank  then  ? 

A.    Much  more  than  there  ought  to  have  been. 

Q.    Did  not  the  store-keepers  use  to  keep  it  then  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    And  did  they  not  use  to  carry  up  a  hogshead,  every  little  while  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  much  of  the  habits  of  the  Southborough  people  now  ?  Do 
you  not  believe  there  were  ten  times  the  amount  drank  there  then  that  there 
is  now  ? 

A.    I  could  not  tell. 


302  APPENDIX. 

Q.  How  many  hogsheads  do  you  suppose  were  carried  into  Southborough, 
forty-five  years  ago,  before  the  temperance  movement  ? 

A.     From  twelve  to  fifteen  in  a  year. 

Q.     How  many  hogsheads  were  there  to  each  store-keeper  ? 

A.  Three,  and  sometimes  four ;  it  was  sometimes  four  or  five  to  each  store- 
keeper. ^ 

Q.     What  was  the  population  of  Lancaster  at  that  time  ? 

A.  I  could  not  tell  exactly.  We  had  a  considerable  portion  of  what  was 
used  from  the  adjoining  towns. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDTMCH.)  I  understood  you  that  you  had  some  definite 
notions  with  reference  to  a  license  law.  Would  you  vest  the  power  of  licens- 
ing in  the  hands  of  County  Commissioners  as  it  formerly  was  ? 

A.     That  would  be  my  impression. 

Q.  You  know  that  the  County  Commissioners  in  Worcester  County 
refused,  for  many  years,  to  grant  licenses  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  would  be  the  case  at  the  present  time  ? 

A.  I  think  not  at  the  present  time,  unless  the  law  provided  that  they 
should. 

Q.     You  think  that  they  would  not  voluntarily  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  JOHN  QUINCY  ADAMS. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  You  have  been  trial  justice  in  Quincy  for  some 
time  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  ever  since  the  law  was  passed. 

Q.     Have  you  been  the  only  one  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir,  until  within  a  year. 

Q.  Has  that  enabled  you  to  form  an  opinion  as  to  the-  operation  of  the 
present  system  of  prohibitory  legislation  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir  ;  I  had  tried  a  great  many  cases- under  it. 

Q.  Will  you  give  the  Committee  the  result  of  your  observations  in  your 
own  way  ? 

A.  Of  course  the  cases  varied.  In  very  many  cases,  and,  in  fact,  in  almost 
all  the  cases,  the  motive  of  operating  to  produce  a  complaint  was  almost 
always  one  of  spite,  or  due  to  some  irritation  conceived  by  the  complain- 
ant. They  run  at  once  to  the  trial  justice,  and  state  the  names  of  all  the 
persons  whom  they  have  reason  to  think  have  obtained  liquor  at  any  particu- 
lar place.  These  cases,  of  course,  I  could  not  resist ;  but  there  was  a  great 
trouble  in  these  cases,  for  persons  would  lie.  I  would  frequently  have  a  case 
where  I  knew  very  well  that  the  witness  was  lying,  and  I  would  say  to  him : 
You  know  you  are  not  telling  the  truth,  and  you  know  that  I  know  that  you 
are  not' telling  the  truth;  but  yet  they  would  not  deny  that  they  were  perjur- 
ing themselves,  but  would  go  on  and  assert  the  same  thing  right  over  again. 
They  seem  to  think,  in  some  cases,  that  it  is  something  which  they  are  entitled 
to  do.  In  many  cases,  however,  the  witnesses  testify  properly.  Then  there 
is  another  trouble ;  it  is,  perhaps,  a  necessary  evil.  These  complaints  fall 
mostly  on  the  poor.  Many  persons  are  led  into  this  business  to  keep  them 


APPENDIX.  303 

from  absolute  want.     I  had  one  case  of  an  Irish  woman  who  was  prosecuted 
for  selling  liquor,  and  who  had  been  driven  to  it  from  want ;  but  the  evidence 
was  against  her  and  she  was  convicted,  and  I  took  the  papers  and  went . 
immediately  to  the  judge  to  get  her  released,  and  in  that  way  the  severity  of 
the  law  was  mitigated. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  as  to  the  practicability  of  exterminating  the 
traffic  by  stopping  the  places  of  open  sale  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  how  it  may  be  where  the  opinions  of  people  are  very 
strongly  one  way  ;  but  it  is  preposterous  to  attempt  it  near  a  large  city  like 
Boston,  according  to  my  experience.  I  have  known  of  cases  where  the  officers 
would  have  a  general  stirring  up  of  the  places  and  would  take  all  the  liquor, 
and  where  people  would  go,  in  fact,  and  destroy  their  liquor,  and  yet  the  next 
day  these  same  places  would  be  in  full  blast  again;  and,  what  is  worse,  they 
get  into  the  habit  of  going  into  back  rooms,  and  making  use  of  cabalistic 
signs  whenever  they  desire  to  get  into  these  places.  That  is  what  I  hear 
from  the  officers. 

Q.     Does  it  result  in  driving  the  sale  into  the  dark  ? 

A.  It  does  ;  and,  what  is  worse,  it  makes  the  liquor  of  most  terrible  stuff. 
Of  course  they  cannot  get  very  high  prices,  and  they  make  it  up  in  this  way 
by  deteriorating  the  quality  of  the  liquor.  I  happen  to  know  something  of 
this,  because  the  liquor  used  to  be  brought  into  the  vaults  of  the  court-house, 
and  I  had  occasion  to  decide  in  reference  to  the  disposal  of  it. 

(2-  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.^  You  say  that  you  cannot  suppress  the  sale  down 
in  Quincy? 

A.     That  is  my  opinion. 

Q.     Have  you  the  State  Constabulary  there  ? 

A.  They  try  it  there  every  few  months,  and  suppress  it  entirely  for  a  day, 
but  there  is  no  great  change  in  the  amount  sold. 

Q.     Have  you  observed  other  towns  ? 

A.  I  have  observed  it  somewhat  in  travelling.  I  was  once  upon  Goyernor 
Andrew's  staff,  and  had  some  occasion  to  notice  it  in  my  travels  at  that  time. 

Q.     Have  you  been  aware  of  the  police  efforts  in  the  city  ? 

A .  I  am  not  acquainted  with  the  police  operations  of  the  city.  I  should 
imagine  that  there  was  no  great  effort.  I  only  judge  from  what  I  see  in  the 
street.  I  never  formed  any  opinion  except  from  these  facts.  I  attributed  it 
to  the  reason  that  it  was  impossible  to  carry  out  the  law  in  Boston,  and  that 
after  one  or  two  comparatively  reasonable  efforts,  they  had  given  it  up. 

Q.     Your  impression  is  that  it  is  within  two  or  three  years  ? 

A.  I  think  the  last  squabble  was  some  two  or  three  years  ago.  It  was 
stated  to  me  that  they  presented  so  many  cases  that  it  was  impossible  to 
obtain  convictions. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HENRY  HILL. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     How  long  have  you  lived  in  Boston  ? 

A.     About  forty-four  years. 

Q.  Have  you  come  to  any  conclusions  in  reference  to  die  expediency  of 
the  present  prohibitory  law,  as  to  its  effects  in  the  suppression  of  intemperance 
and  drunkenness  f 


804  APPENDIX. 

A.  Perhaps  I  ought  to  say  in  regard  to  my  residence 'that,  although  my 
place  of  business  has  been  in  Boston  for  the  whole  period  that  I  mention,  I 
now  reside  in  Braintree,  and  hare  also  resided  in  Roxbury  of  late.  I  have 
been  in  favor  of  what  has  been  called  the  Maine  law,  which,  I  suppose,  has 
operated  very  well  in  the  country,  in  small  places ;  but  I  have  supposed  that 
it  was  to  a  great  extent  inoperative  in  cities  and  large  towns.  I  have  come 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  law  cannot  be  carried  out  in  large  towns  and  cities ; 
and,  therefore,  it  has  seemed  to  me  that  something  else  was  necessary,  some- 
thing more  and  something  different  from  the  present  laws.  And  it  has  seemed 
to  me  that  a  stringent  license  law,  perhaps  like  the  law  recently  enacted  in 
New  York,  would  aid  in  the  suppression  of  intemperance. 

Q.     Do  they  openly  sell  brandies  and  whiskey  in  Braintree  ? 

A .    Not  that  I  am  aware  of. 

Q.     Is  their  intemperance  there,  so  far  as  you  know  ? 

A.  It  is  said,  and  I  believe  it  to  be  true,  that  in  Braintree  and  in  Wey- 
mouth,  (I  am  almost  on  the  line  of  Weymouth,)  almost  all  the  Irish  women 
sell  intoxicating  liquors. 

Q.    No  public  sales  that  you  are  aware  of? 

A.    Not  that  I  am  aware  of;  though  I  have  not  been  about  a  great  deal. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MORSE.)     What  is  your  present  business  ? 

A.    I  am  treasurer  of  the  American  Tract  Society. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Has  there  been  a  worse  or  a  better  state  of  things, 
speaking  in  general  terms,  in  regard  to  the  use  of  liquor,  than  there  was 
twenty  years  ago. 

A.  I  have  only  been  for  the  last  six  years  in  the  neighborhood  where  I  am 
now  residing. 

Q.  So  far  as  your  observation  goes  in  that  community  and  in  others  that 
you  have  been  acquainted  with  for  the  past  twenty  years  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  I  could  give  any  definite  opinion  on  that  subject. 

Q.  Have  you  any  reason  to  think  that  the  state  of  things  in  regard  to  the 
sale  of  liquors  was  worse  then  than  you  have  known  it  in  other  places  ? 

A .     I  should  think  it  was,  sir. 

Q.     Among  Americans  or  foreigners  ? 

A .     I  never  have  distinguished. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  it  is  quite  proper  to  allow  something  for  the  foreign 
element  coming  among  us  ? 

A.    I  have  no  doubt  that  would  make  some  difference. 

Q.  Excluding  that  class  of  society,  is  not  the  community  in  your  neigh- 
borhood as  good  in  this  respect  ? 

A.     I  think  there  is  a  great  deal  of  intoxicating  liquor  drank,  sir. 

Q.     I  understand  that  you  do  not  see  much  drunkenness  ? 

A.    No,  sir.    I  am  not  where  I  am  likely  to  see. 

A.     How  large  a  number  do  you  see  each  day  who  are  drunk  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  There  are  a  good  many  cases  where  persons  who  are 
drunk  are  brought  before  the  courts. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  time  within  twenty  years  when  that  could  not  be 
seen? 


APPENDIX.  305 

Q.  I  think  I  could  see  no  more  cases  of  public  offences  in  Roxbury  twenty 
or  thirty  years  ago  than  I  do  now. 

Q.  Have  you  observed  the  extermination  of  any  crime  by  law  or  moral 
suasion,  or  by  both  ? 

A.    I  believe  that  almost  all  laws  are  violated  more  or  less. 

Q.  Have  you  any  reason  to  think  that  if  a  prohibitory  law  were  as  well 
executed  as  is  practicable  with  an  adequate  force,  do  you  not  think  that  the 
open  traffic  could  be  suppressed,  and  that,  after  a  time,  a  new  generation 
could  be  grown  which  should  be  largely  free  from  such  contamination  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  the  present  laws  can  be  enforced  so  as  to  suppress 
intemperance  to  so  great  an  extent  as  could  be  done  by  a  stringent  license 
law. 

Q.    Precisely  what  kind  of  a  license  law  would  you  introduce  ? 

A.  I  have  never  assisted  in  framing  any  law ;  but  I  should  refer  to  the 
laws  (as  alluded  to  in  the  papers)  enacted  in  the  State  of  New  York. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  the  system  of  drinking  is  less  rife  in  New  York 
than  in  Massachusetts  ? 

A.     No,  sir ;  I  do  not. 

Q.     Then  how  can  you  state  the  instances  ? 

A.  I  know  something  of  the  city  of  New  York  and  something  of  the  city 
of  Boston.  I  think  that  the  laws,  if  enforced,  would  have  a  good  effect  in 
the  city  of  Boston. 

Q.  Do  you  or  do  you  not  feel  that  the  example  of  the  moderate  use  by 
clergymen  and  church  officers  and  high  officials,  is  detrimental  to  the  public 
good  ? 

A.     I  do. 

Q.  You  are  yourself  a  temperance  man,  as  the  phrase  is  generally 
understood  V 

A.  I  have  been  for  the  last  forty  years  making  the  experiment  of  doing 
without  intoxicating  drinks,  and  I  think  it  works  very  well  thus  far. 

Q,  Have  you  any  doubt  that  the  public  good  would  be  very  much  pro- 
moted if  all  high  officials  should  do  without  it  ? 

A.     I  think  it  would. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  prohibition  can  be  said  to  have  had  a  fair  trial  in 
any  community  where  the  clergy  and  civil  officers  and  high  officials  have 
thrown  their  practical  example  against  the  law  ? 

Q.  I  have  not  known  such  'a  case.  I  do  not  know  what  would  be  the 
effect. 

Adjourned. 


306  APPENDIX. 


TENTH    DAY. 

THURSDAY,  March  7th,  1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  resumed  the  hearing  of  testi 
mony  in  behalf  of  the  petitioners.  • 

TESTIMONY  OP  REV.  FREDERICK  H.  HEDGE,  D.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     Where  is  your  residence  ? 

A.     In  Brookline. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  in  the  ministry  ? 

A.     For  thirty-seven  years. 

Q.     Have  you  been  in  this  State  for  the  whole  time  ? 

A.  I  was  fifteen  years  in  Maine,  and  six  years  and  a  half  in  Rhode 
Island.  I  have  been  at  Brookline  for  ten  years. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  any  conclusion  to  which  you  may 
have  been  led,  as  to  the  effect  on  society  of  any  attempt  to  constrain  men  to 
temperance  by  prohibitory  legislation  ? 

A.  My  experience  has  not  been  very  extensive  in  respect  to  this  subject 
My  observation,  perhaps,  has  not  been  quite  so  close  as  that  of  other  men 
who  have  had  equal  opportunities  of  observation  ;  but  as  far  as  my  observa- 
tion and  experience  go,  I  am  decidedly  of  the  opinion  that  the  enactment  of 
the  prohibitory  liquor  law,  which  aims  at  the  entire  suppression  of  the  sale  of 
liquors,  expecting  thereby  to  prevent  and  suppress  intemperance,  was  a  mis- 
taken legislation,  and  that  it  has  not  accomplished  the  end  desired.  I  think 
the  law  militates  against  several  important  principles  or  interests.  It  seems 
to  me  to  be  a  violation  of  the  very  obvious  principle,  that  where  there  is  a 
demand,  there  will,  in  the  nature  of  things,  be  a  supply,  and  that,  if  the 
supply  is  not  open  and  allowed,  it  will  be  secret  and  illegitimate.  If  it  could 
be  established, — if  I  could,  myself,  admit  the  principle  that  the  use  of  all 
alcoholic  liquors  was  a  sin,  it  would  follow,  of  course,  that  the  sale  of  them 
was  a  sin ;  if  the  sale  of  it  were  a  sin,  then  the  Legislature  would  have,  a 
right  to  suppress  it  altogether,  even  at  the  risk  of  secret  gratification — a  risk 
which,  of  course,  is  assumed  in  relation  to- every  sin,  and  in  all  attempts  to 
prohibit  sin.  In- individual  cases,  it  may  be,  (but,  according  to  the  best  of  my 
judgment,  it  cannot  be  established  as  an  absolute  principle),  that  the  use  or 
sale  of  alcoholic  liquors  is  a  sin  ;  and,  therefore,  it  seems  to  me,  it  is  unwise 
legislation  to  make  that  secret  and  illegitimate  which  had  better,  if  it  exist 
at  all,  be  in  the  face  of  day,  and  open.  I  have  been  told  by  those. who  have 
good  opportunities  of  knowing,  and  it  has  been  the  impression  that  I  have 
received  from  reading  the  reports  of  the  testimony  offered  before  this  Com- 
mittee, that  the  attempt  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor  drives  it  into  out-of- 
the-way  places,  into  the  cellars  and  dark  corners,  where,  I  suppose,  it  does 
a  great  deal  more  barm  than  it  would  in  the  face  of  day.  In  attempting  to 
suppress  a  great  evil  in  that  way,  I  consider  that  the  State  creates  a  crime 
to  suppress  an  evil.  The  law  being  on  the  statute-book,  any  violation  of 


APPENDIX.  307 

that  law  is  a  crime,  and  a  crime  against  the  Common-wealth.  I  think  that 
the  prohibitory  measures  which  have  been  employed  here  and  elsewhere  for 
the  suppression  of  the  sale  of  liquor,  has  tended  to  create  a  great  deal  of  moral 
evil,  in  attempting  to  suppress  a  physical  evil,  for  intemperance  is  largely 
to  be  considered  under  that  head.  It  has  created  a  great  deal  of  moral 
evil — a  great  deal  of  concealment  and  hypocrisy — a  great  many  attempts 
to  evade  the  law,  by  people  who  ought  to  be  above  the  necessity  of  any 
vindication  of  their  conduct.  It  has  had  the  effect  of  driving  ministers 
of  the  gospel  to  concealment,  because  public  opinion  would  not  sanction  a 
use  which  they  considered,  in  the  exercise  of  their  best  judgment,  to  be 
lawful.  On  the  other  hand,  I  think  that  it  has  created  a  rebellious  feeling — 
an  alienation,  among  a  certain  class  of  people,  from  the  law.  It  has  had  a 
tendency  to  throw  contempt  upon  law,  and  to  diminish  the  reverence  which 
ought  to  be  entertained  for  the  law.  Moreover,  it  seems  to  me  that  the  law 
makes  a  great  mistake  in  not  discriminating  between  different  articles  of 
drink,  which  seem  to  me  to  be  essentially  different  in  their  kind,  and  in  their 
operation,  and  the  use  of  which  is  attended  with  very  different  effects.  It 
does  not  discriminate  between  the  use  of  pure  alcohol,  and  the  use  of  liquors 
which  have  something  of  the  alcoholic  principle  in  them,  but  whose  effect  is 
very  different  from  that  of  whiskey,  rum,  gin,  &c.  The  law  prohibits  the  sale 
of  beer,  of  ale,  of  cider  and  of  wine,  as  well  as  of  ardent  spirits.  That  wamt 
of  discrimination  has  always  seemed  to  me  to  be  a  mistake  with  legislation. 

I  spoke  of  the  hypocrisy  which  is  engendered,  either  directly  or  indirectly, 
by  these  prohibitory  laws.  I  remember  being  in  Maine,  very  soon  after  the 
passage  of  the  famous  Maine  Law,  and  a  gentleman  whom  I  met  at  a  public 
house,  who  was  on  a  lecturing  tour,  was  advocating  the  law.  I  expressed  my 
doubt  about  the  law  and  my  regret  that  it  had  ever  been  passed.  He  sai<jl 
that  "  it  was  a  very  good  law ;  that  it  did  not  prevent  a  gentleman  from 
having  his  wine ;  that  he  used  his  wine  as  he  had  always  done,  and  if  I  lived 
in  the  State  it  would  be  easy  for  me  to  have  and  use  wine."  It  seemed  to 
me  that  that  was  an  illustration  of  the  moral  influence  exerted  by  that  law 
and  by  that  species  of  legislation,  which  I  considered  very  much  to  be 
deprecated. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)  Do  I  understand  you  to  make  a  difference 
between  fermented  and  distilled  liquors  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  suppose  that  the  use  of  distilled  liquors  is  more  deleterious 
than  the  use  of  fermented.  It  requires  a  smaller  portion  of  distilled  than  of 
fermented  liquor  to  produce  an  injurious  effect. 

Q.     But  is  there  any  difference  in  the  nature  of  the  article  ? 

A.  That  is  a  question  for  chemists  and  physiologists  to  decide.  I  can  only 
say,  from  my  own  experience,  that  it  would  not  agree  with  me  to  drink  ardent 
spirits  in  any  shape.  I  have  not  had  a  great  deal  of  experience  in  their  use, 
but  what  little  I  have  had  convinces  me  that  they  would  not  be  well  for  me. 
They  were  once  prescribed  for  me  by  a  physician,  but,  after  two  days'  trial,  I 
was  confident  that  it  was  not  the  remedy  for  me.  I  never  experienced  any 
ill  effect  from  the  use  of  fermented  liquor,  which  I  have  never,  in  theory  at 
least,  disused.  Practically,  for  years,  I  have  not  used  fermented  liquor,  but 
have  always  thought  I  had  the  right  to  use  it. 


308  APPENDIX. 

Q.    You  have  travelled  in  Europe,  I  presume  ? 

A.     I  have. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  observed  in  the  different  countries  the  different  degrees 
.of  temperance  or  intemperance  ? 

A.  I  never  saw  a  case  of  drunkenness  in  Italy.  I  was  there  six  months,  but 
never  witnessed  a  case  of  intoxication.  I  was  in  Germany  more  than  five 
years.  I  have  seen  there,  during  that  time,  cases  of  excitement  from  the"  use 
of  liquor,  but  I  do  not  remember  any  case  of  confirmed  intemperance.  I 
suppose  there  were  such  cases,  but  they  were  so  few  in  number  as  not  to  make 
themselves  prominent.  In  France  I  saw  one  or  two  cases  during  the  short 
time  that  I  was  there,  of  what  seemed  to  me,  at  least,  to  be  intoxication ;  but 
from  my  experience  in  Europe,  I  should  say  that  the  opportunities  there  exist- 
ing for  procuring  cheap  wines  and  cheap  malt  liquors,  were  somewhat  of  a  safe- 
guard against  the  evils  resulting  from  the  use  of  distilled  liquors. 

Q.     The  Germans  drink  beer  chiefly,  I  suppose  ? 

A.  They  drink  beer  chiefly,  although  in  Southern  Germany  a  great  deal 
of  wine  is  used. 

Q.     Their  beers  are  generally  of  a  lighter  kind,  are  they  not  ? 

A.  The  Bavarian  beer,  I  should  say,  was  as  strong  as  English  ale,  but  the 
beer  used  in  other  parts  of  Germany  is  very  light  indeed ;  it  has  hardly 
any  of  the  alcoholic  principle  in  it. 

Q.  In  countries  where  they  used  stronger  beer,  did  you  not  observe  a  gen- 
eral dullness  among  the  people  ? 

A.  I  have  heard  that  that  was  the  effect  of  the  stronger  beers,  but  I  can- 
not say  that  my  own  experience  confirms  the  statement.  Certainly,  the  Aus- 
trians  and  Bavarians  are  not  so  lively  a  people  as  the  Italians  and  the  French, 
but  whether  it  is  owing  to  the  use  of  malt  liquors,  or  to  the  climate  and  race 
I  cannot  say.  I  think  it  probable  that  malt  liquors  may  have  that  effect. 
•  Q.  Have  you  been  much  in  England  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  observed  the  effect  of  the  use  of  strong  beers  upon  the 
English  ? 

A.  I  have  had  limited  opportunities  for  observation,  but  in  London  I 
should  say  that  there  was  a  good  deal  of  intemperance  ;  whether  owing  to  the 
use  of  malt  liquors  or  of  ardent  spirits,  I  cannot  say.  My  stay  there  was  not 
more  than  two  months,  but  I  saw  more  cases  of  intoxication  in  England 
during  those  two  months,  than  I  did  on  the  Continent  in  five  years. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  much  said,  while  you  were  in  Pa*ris,  of  the  habit  of 
the  people  of  going,  on  Saturday  or  Sunday,  outside  of  the  walls  of  the  city, 
where  wine  could  be  obtained  cheaply,  and  having  a  "  high  time  "  there,  and 
getting  intoxicated  ?  Did  you  observe  or  hear  that  they  drank  to  that  excess 
that  they  would  become  stupid,  and  waste  their  time  and  money  ? 

A.  I  do  not  remember  hearing  that  in  Paris.  I  remember  one  very  remark- 
able incident  in  Saxony.  There  was  a  festival,  at  which  I  should  think  some 
twenty  thousand  people  were  present, — a  popular  festival — a  gathering  of  the 
inhabitants  of  the  city,  and  of  the  country  around.  I  saw  that  drinks  of  all 
kinds  were  sold  at  the  tables.  I  was  on  the  ground  for  four  or  five  hours,  but 
I  did  not  see  a  single  case  of  intoxication,  or  anything  approaching  it. 


APPENDIX.  809 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  we  can  get  any  of  the  pure  wines  of  Europe  in 
this  country  ? 

A.  I  think  that  we  get  them  as  pure  as  they  are  made  in  Europe.  There 
is  a  great  deal  of  adulteration  of  wine  in  Europe.  I  think  that  it  is  possible 
to  get  wines  as  pure  as  are  used  there. 

Q.  You  say  that  there  is  a  great  deal  of  adulteration  there  ;  but  is  there 
not  a  good  deal  of  wine  sold,  that  is  unadulterated  and  pure  ? 

A.  The  pure  wines  are  of  two  kinds, — one  so  light  as  not  to  bear  exporta- 
tion. They  are  very  light  wines,  indeed.  There  are  one  or  two  of  the 
Rhenish  wines  of  that  character,  and  one  or  two  of  the  Italian ; — they  are  as 
light  as  the  weakest  cider.  Such  wines  are  not  exported,  because  they  would 
not  bear  exportation.  Another  kind  of  wine  is  exceedingly  expensive  and 
difficult  to  obtain,  because  it  is  grown  only  in  certain  and  very  limited  locali- 
ties,— the  Hungarian  wine,  for  instance.  Such  wines,  I  suppose,  are  never 
exported.  Of  course,  there  is  a  pretence  of  exportation ;  but  I  suppose  that 
unless  some  gentleman  for  his  own  private  use  brings  them  out  of  the  country, 
that  they  are  never  exported. 

Q.     Those  wines  are  very  limited  in  quantity,  are  they  not  ? 

A.     They  are  said  to  be  very  limited. 

Q.  Could  you  find  an  article  sold  for  them  in  almost  any  store  or  hotel  in 
Europe  or  America  ? 

A.  It  may  be  so.  I  think,  however,  that  I  never  heard  of  Tokay  being 
sold  in  this  country  at  the  stores,  but  I  have  heard  of  some  of  the  other  choice 
wines -being  sold. 

Q.    Have  you  any  idea  that  they  were  what  they  were  represented  to  be  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  the  lighter  wines  being  unfit  for  exportation  without 
enforcement.  Do  you  know  whether  even  the  stronger  wines,  such  as 
Madeira  and  Sherry  are  also  enforced  before  they  are  shipped  ? 

A.  I  think  likely  they  are.  I  judge  so  from  the  very  general  belief  that 
they  are  enforced. 

Q.  Do  you  not  believe  that  there  are  a  great  many  preperations  which 
are  sold  as  wine  here  and  represented  as  imported  that  are  not  genuine  ? 

A.     That  is  a  thing  I  should  be  obliged  to  take  upon  trust  entirely. 

Q.     Have  you  not  an  opinion  about  it  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  that  I  have  formed  any  very  definite  opinion  about  it. 
My  impression  is  that  such  wines  are  sold, — or  at  least  wines  that  contain  a 
very  small  proportion  indeed  of  the  genuine  article  which  they  purport  to  be. 
They  are  mixed  with  articles  more  or  less  injurious.  Sometimes  wines  are 
manufactured  which  are  perhaps  no  more  injurious  than  the  genuine  would 
be.  It  depends  upon  what  Articles  are  used  in  adulteration. 

Q.     But  such  preparations  are  not  wines  ? 

A.  They  are  wines,  I  am  told ; — tney  are  imitations  by  combination.  A 
very  light  wine  is  taken  as  a  base,  and  other  pure  wines  mixed  with  it.  A 
flavor  is  thus  given  to  the  article  which  will  change  its  character. 

Q.  But  do  you  not  know  that  the  adulterated  wines  are  taking  the  place 
of  every  other, — that  the  articles  used  here  are  so  unlike  the  pure,  simple 
wines  used  there,  that  they  are  to  be  regarded  as  a  very  different  article  from 


310  APPENDIX. 

the  pure  wine.  If  you  thought  that  the  use  of  the  natural,  simple  wine  might 
be  beneficial  to  you,  would  it  not  still  be  a  question  with  you  whether  the 
article  here  sold  as  wine,  was  enough  like  the  genuine  to  be  considered 
beneficial  ? 

A.  It  would  depend  upon  circumstances.  It  would  depend  upon  where 
the  article  was  bought,  and  of  the  probability  there  was  of  the  pure  article 
being  found  in  the  place.  If  I  go  to  an  importing  house,  I  suppose  that  there 
is  a  reasonable  probability  of  getting  as  pure  an  article  as  is  sold ;  but  in 
drinking  saloons,  I  suppose  that  it  is  improbable  that  such  an  article  could  be 
found. 

Q.  If  you  should  go  to  the  most  respectable  importer  in  the  city,  and  want 
some  of  the  best  wine,  and  he  should  tell  you  that  he  had  it,  and  you  should 
ask  him  if  his  wine  was  enforced,  and  he  should  say  that  it  would  not  bear 
the  voyage  without  being  enforced  with  brandy,  which  was  substantially  the 
same  thing ;  what  would  you  think  of  the  use  of  such  wine,  as  compared  with 
the  simple  wine  ? 

A.  I  answered  that  question  when  I  said  that  wines  could  probably  be 
bought  as  pure  here  as  on  the  other  side  in  the  shops  and  drinking-houses.  I 
suppose  that  they  are  enforced  there,  before  they  are  exported. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  they  are  often  enforced  by  alcohol  made  from 
American  whiskey  ? 

A.  I  have  no  means  of  knowing,  and  have  no  right  to  any  opinion  about 
it. 

Q.  But,  considering  the  adulterations  and  the  enforcement  which  wines 
undergo,  you  are  satisfied  that  the  wines  ordinarily  sold  here  are  very  different 
from  the  pure  simple  wines  which  they  are  represented  to  be  ? 

A.  I  suppose,  that  in  drinking-saloons,  and  in  out-of-the-way  taverns 
or  such  places  as  are  usually  designated  as  low  taverns,  you  would  not  be 
likely  to  find  anything  like  a  pure  article. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  the  influence  of  prohibitory  legislation  in  making  men 
deceitful  and  hypocritical,  &c.  You  were  in  Maine  awhile  ? 

A.     I  was  not  a  resident  of  Maine  after  the  Maine  Law  was  passed. 

Q.  You  were  understood  to  say  that  intemperance  was  rather  a  physical 
than  a  moral  evil ;  have  we  understood  you  correctly  ? 

A.  I  think  that  it  is  in  a  great  many  cases.  I  do  not  mean  to  say  that 
there  is  no  moral  evil  connected  with  it ;  but  in  some  cases  that  have  been 
known  to  me,  I  think  that  it  is  very  much  to  be  regarded  as  a  disease. 

Q.  Has  not  your  observation  and  reading  shown  you  that  two-thirds  or 
three-fourths  of  all  the  offences  against  the  laws,  have  been  committed  under 
the  influence  of  intoxicating  drinks,  either  directly  or  indirectly  ? 

A.     I  think  that  a  very  large  proportion  are. 

Q.     Then  does  it  not  produce  a  very  great  degree  of  moral  evil  ? 

A.  I  have  been  understood,  perhaps,  as  distinguishing  more  closely  than  I 
intended  to  do,  between  what  is  purely  moral  and  what  is  imperfectly  so. 
What  I  desire  to  say  is,  that  a  man  who  should  commit  murder  or  man- 
slaughter, under  the  influence  of  liquor,  would  not  be  guilty  of  the  same 
amount  of  moral  wrong,  and  the  act  would  not  have  the  same  moral  charac- 
ter, as  the  act  of  a  man  who  deliberately  planned  and  executed  a  murder. 


APPENDIX.  311 

Q.  Suppose  a  man  has  a  desire  to  murder,  and  takes  brandy  enough  to 
stupefy  his  moral  faculties  before  committing  the  act,  what  would  you  think  of 
the  morality  of  the  act  in  such  a  case  ? 

A.  I  should  think  the  act  just  as  immoral  as  if  the  brandy  had  not  been 
taken.  In  that  case  the  use  of  the  brandy  would  be  a  means  to  accomplish 
the  end.  If  such  means  are  adopted  with  a  view  to  that  end,  of  course  the 
morality  of  the  act  is  the  same. 

Q.  Are  there  not  many  families  made  miserable  by  the  intemperate  habits 
of  some  member  of  the  family  ? 

A.     Certainly  ;  there  can  be  no  doubt  about  that. 

Q.  And  a  great  deal  of  poverty,  degradation,  vice  and  misery  of  every 
kind  caused  by  intemperance  ? 

A.     There  is  no  doubt  of  it. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  particular  benefits  to  the  community,  arising  from 
the  use  of  distilled  liquors  ? 

A.  I  am  not  prepared  to  answer  that  question.  It  is  a  question  that  I 
must  leave  to  the  physicians  who  prescribe  ardent  spirits.  I  cannot  say  that 
I  have  ever  seen  any  good  effects  resulting  from  their  use,  but  I  have  no  right 
to  suppose  there  never  is  any  good  derived  from  their  use.  . 

Q.  But  you  are  aware  that  there  are  a  great  many  evils  resulting  from 
their  use  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Then,  acting  for  the  best  good  of  the  community,  desiring  to  produce 
the  greatest  amount  of  good,  should  that  possible,  trifling  good,  be  placed  as 
an  offset  to  the  great  evils  that  are  known  ?  If  by  prohibition,  you  could  get 
rid  of  the  great  evils  to  a  great  extent,  would  it  not  be  worth  while  to 
prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor,  although  sometimes  there  may  be  some  trifling 
good  resulting  from  it  ? 

A.  I  am  not  prepared  to  answer  that  question  either  in  the  affirmative  or 
in  the  negative.  I  have  not  entirely  made  up  my  mind  upon  that  subject. 
But  of  one  thing  I  am  very  well  satisfied :  that  a  prohibitory  law,  or  an 
attempt  to  prohibit  entirely  the  use  of  liquor,  will  not  effect  the  end  desired. 

Q.  Is  it  not,  in  your  judgment,  a  moral  evil  or  wrong  for  an  individual  to 
indulge  in  a  habit  without  any  very  sensible  good  resulting  from  it,  and  the 
consequences  of  which  so  often  are  evil,  and  that  evil  so  very  great  ?  For 
instance,  seeing  the  great  evils  of  intemperance  in  a  community,  a  man  says  : 
"  I  drink  my  glass  of  liquor  once  per  day ;  I  do  not  see  that  that  hurts  me 
much,  but  I  see  that  men  become  intemperate  before  they  are  aware  of  it ; 
and  considering  the  evils  which  result  to  others  from  the  habit,  I  will  not 
sanction  by  my  practice  a  custom  which  produces  so  much  evil."  "Would 
you  not  think  that  such  a  man  had  taken  a  wise  course  ? 

A.  I  should  say  that  a  man  was  perfectly  justified  in  taking  that  position. 
I  am  not  prepared  however,  to  say  that  it  is  morally  obligatory  upon  him  to 
do  so. 

Q.  Is  it  not  morally  obligatory  upon  every  man  to  pursue  just  such  a 
course  of  life  as  will  be  most  beneficial  to  himself  and  to  the  community  ? 

[Question  objected  to,  and  waived.] 


312  APPENDIX. 

TESTIMONY  OP  REV.  RUFTJS  ELLIS. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  You  are  the  pastor  of  the  Chauncy  Street 
Church  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    How  long  have  you  been  in  the  ministry  ? 

A.    Twenty-six  years. 

Q.    At  that  place  ? 

A.  I  have  been  fourteen  years  with  the  Chauncy  Street  Church,  ten 
years  at  Northampton,  and  a  portion  of  the  time  at  Rochester,  New  York. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  the  result  of  your  observations  as  to 
the  effect  of  prohibitory  legislation  in  inculcating  temperance  ? 

A.  I  have  observed  its  effect,  not  very  closely,  perhaps,  but  yet  to  a 
considerable  extent,  in  my  intercourse  with  th*e  various  classes — not  only  with 
persons  in  good  circumstances,  but  also  with  the  poor,  and  sometimes  with 
the  very  poor  in  the  country  and  in  the  city.  My  impression  is  very  strong 
that  very  little  good  is  to  be  expected  in  this  matter  from  any  form  of  law ; 
that  if  any  one  is  expecting  great  results  from  a  license  law,  he  will  be 
disappointed,  and  that  those  who  have  expected  great  results  from  a  prohibi- 
tory law  have  been  disappointed.  I  have  not  however  been  -inclined  to  think 
that  all  the  apparent  increase  of  intemperance  of  late  years  is  to  be  attributed 
to  the  prohibitory  law.  It  was  something  that  we  all  looked  for  as  a  part  of 
the  inevitable  demoralization  of  the  country  that  would  result  from  a  great 
war ;  and  affecting  as  it  did  not  only  those  who  went  to  the  war,  but  also 
those  who  remained  at  home,  in  the  excitement  that  was  produced  in  the 
whole  community,  in  the  more  careless  ways  of  living,  and  in  the  greater 
freedom  of  the  persons  who  remained  behind.  I  think  that  a  great  deal  of 
the  trouble  is  to  be  attributed  to  the  war,  but  I  think  also  that  a  part  of  it 
is  to  be  ascribed  to  the  prohibitory  law,  which  it  seems  to  me  to  be  ill-founded 
in  principle  and  inefficient  in  its  workings.  It  is  a  law  that  I  do  not  think  can 
be  carried  out  for  the  reason  that  the  conscience  and  judgment  of  the 
community  do  not  go  along  with  it.  There  are  a  great  many  persons  whose 
opinions  are  entitled  to  consideration  and  weight,  who  believe  that  it  is  an 
unsound  and  unjustifiable  measure.  I  have  noticed  that  some  persons  have 
said  that  there  was  a  great  difference  between  the  city  and  the  country  in 
this  respect. 

I  have  lived  ten  years  in  the  country,  where  that  law  was  supposed  to  be 
pretty  generally  enforced ;  where  the  most  respectable  portion  of  the  inhabi- 
tants were  in  the  habit  of  going  to  the  liquor  agency  to  obtain  what  the  phy- 
sicians prescribed  ;  but  I  do  not  think  that  there  was  any  gain  in  respect  to 
temperance  in  that  neighborhood  from  the  action  of  the  law,  and  a  great  deal 
of  the  attempt  to  enforce  the  law  was  very  careless,  even  there  ;  and  it  seemed 
to  me,  from  the  very  force  of  circumstances,  inevitably  so. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  think  it  possible  to  discriminate  closely  in 
a  great  social  question,  like  that  under  consideration,  between  the  conse- 
quences of  the  great  public  excitement  to  which  you  refer,  upon  soldiers  and 
civilians,  on  the  one  hand,  and  an  objectionable  law  on  the  other  hand  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  that  it  is. 


APPENDIX.  313 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  are  you  able  to  trace  any  evil  consequences  which 
you  may  have  noticed  in  this  community,  to  the  influence  of  the  law,  or  do 
you  rather  in  theory  connect  them  with  the  law  ? 

A .  I  think  that  I  could,  in  actual  fact,  connect  many  of  them  with  the  law, 
although  I  attribute  a  vast  deal  of  intemperance  to  the  war. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  there  is  anything  pertaining  to  such  laws  tending  to 
demoralize,  that  does  not  attach  to  the  laws  respecting  gambling  ? 

A,  Yes,  sir ;  I  think  there  is.  I  think  that  the  fact  that  the  moral  sentis 
ment  of  a  large  portion  of  the  community  does  not  approve  the  law,  tend- 
to  demoralize  the  community,  as  does  also  the  fact  that  an  attempt  to  prohibit 
entirely  the  sale  of  ardent  spirits  would  drive  the  traffic  into  secret  places. 

Q.  The  question  is,  whether  there  is  anything  in  the  principle  of  prohibi- 
tion, as  applied  to  this  social  evil,  that  is  not  involved  in  the  principle  of  pro- 
hibition as  applied  to  other  social  evils  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  use  of  ardent  spirits,  in  any  way,  in  its  purer  forms, — 
in  wine,  or  even  in  cider  or  beer, — is  not  to  be  regarded  as  what  the  moralist 
would  call  "  malum  per  se"  as  an  evil  in  and  of  itself. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  the  encouragement  by  example  of  a  social  custom, 
out  of  which  so  great  social  evils  flow,  by  a  steady  tendency  becomes  itself  a 
sin  ?  Granting  the  absence  of  sin  per  se  in  the  use  of  a  single  glass,  is  not  a 
moral  man,  or  a  Christian  man,  called  upon  from  mere  duty  and  upon  the 
ground  of  conscience,  to  abjure  a  custom  which,  by  so  steady  a  law,  tends  to 
increase  such  great  social  evils  ? 

A.  I  think  that  is  a  question  which  would  be  answered  very  differently  by 
different  persons.  I  would  not  undertake  to  dictate  an  answer  to  such  a 
question,  but  would  respect  the  conscientious  judgment  of  others. 

Q.     I  ask  your  own  opinion  ? 

A.     I  should  not  pronounce  definitely  in  the  affirmative. 

Q.  What  view  do  you  take  of  Paul's  remark,  that  he  would  neither  eat 
meat,  nor  drink  wine,  nor  do  anything  whereby  his  brother  should  be 
offended  or  made  weak  V  , 

A.  That  very  text  was  in  my  mind  when  you  first  asked  the  question. 
It  would  take  me  a  good  while  to  explain  my  application  of  that  to  the  matter 
in  hand  ;  but  I  do  not  regard  it  as  settling  the  question  authoritatively  in  the 
affirmative.  It  would  take  me  a  good  while  to  unfold  my  reasons  for  that 
conviction.  I  do  not  regard  Paul  as  having  settled  the  question  in  that  way. 
Understand,  however,  that  I  do  not  object  to  his  authority,  but  to  the 
application. 

Q.  But  do  you  think  that  a  man  does  wrong  in  pursuing  a  practice,  out  of 
which  so  great  social  evils  flow  ? 

A.  He  may  or  he  may  not  do  wrong ;  it  depends  entirely  upon  the  special 
circumstances  in  which  he  is  placed. 

Q.     But  placed  in  the  midst  of  a  community  like  this  in  which  we  live  ? 

A.  Still  there  might  be  a  great  difference  in  circumstances.  For  instance, 
if  I  were  surrounded,  as  I  have  been  in  the  course  of  my  life,  by  young  stu- 
dents, living  in  my  family,  and  I  wished  to  train  them  in  a  particular  course, 
I  should  feel  bound  to  do,  and  to  abstain  from  doing,  a  great  many  things 
which  I  should  not  do  or  abstain  from  under  other  circumstances. 
40 


314  APPENDIX. 

Q.  But  do  you  not  think  that  the  same  principle  which  would  lead  you  to 
abstain  from  a  paiticular  practice  in  the.  presence  of  students,  would  lead  you, 
as  a  citizen  of  a  community  which  would  naturally  know  your  customs,  to 
refrain  from  doing  that  which  would  exert  a  deleterious  influence  upon 
society  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  it  would  require  half  an  hour's  talk  to  explain  myself 
fully,  without  the  liability  of  being  misrepresented. 

TESTIMONY  or  PROF.  FRANCIS  BOWEN. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     Your  home  is  in  Cambridge  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     What  is  your  profession  ? 

A.  1  am  a  professor  in  Harvard  College,  of  Natural  Religion  and  Moral 
Philosophy. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  in  your  own  way  to  what  results 
your  mind  has  been  brought,  if  to  any,  concerning  the  moral  utility  and 
advantage  to  the  people,  of  an  attempt  to  promote  temperance  by  prohib- 
itory legislation  ? 

A.  Perhaps  my  opinion  or  testimony  in  respect  to  the  practical  operation 
of  a  prohibitory  law  is  not  worth  much,  as  my  means  of  observation  have 
been  rather  limited,  but  so  far  as  my  observation  has  extended,  I  am  of  the 
opinion  that  the  law  is  inoperative  for  good,  and  that  it  is  operative,  to  some 
extent,  for  evil.  In  the  city  in  which  I  live — a  city  of  thirty  thousand  inhab- 
itants— it  is  as  easy  to  buy  liquor  now  as  it  is  to  buy  bread,  and  it  can  be  had, 
even,  at  a  greater  number  of  places.  Perhaps  we  need  not  seek  far  for  the 
reason.  Under  a  popular  government  like  ours,  criminal  law  can  have  very 
little  influence  for  good  except  it  is  backed  up  and  supported  by  the  moral 
sense,  not  merely  of  a  majority  of  the  community,  but  of  vastly  the  larger 
portion  of  the  community.  In  civil  matters  a  mere  majority  of  the  com- 
munity or  legislature  may  decide,  and  the  laAV  which  they  make  will  be 
respected ;  but  in  criminal  matters  it  is  not  for  the  legislature  to  tell  me,  or  to 
tell  any  other  man,  what  is  absolutely  right  or  what  is  absolutely  wrong.  That 
is  a  matter  between  me  and  my  conscience  and  my  God.  So  far  as  the  crim- 
ir.al  law  of  the  community  is  in  conformity  with  the  moral  sense  of  the  whole 
community,  or  of  vastly  the  larger  portion  of  that  community,  in  my  opinion, 
it  will  be  enforced ;  but  notoriously  that  is  not  the  case  with  this  prohibitory 
law  respecting  the  sale  of  liquor.  A  very  large  number  doubt  whether  the 
sale  of  liquor  is  any  moral  offence  whatever.  Those  who  do  not  positively 
deny  it  to  be  a  moral  offence,  are  in  doubt  upon  the  subject.  The  number  who 
positively  affirm  it  to  be  a  sin,  cannot  be  even  a  large  minority — cannot  be 
equal  to  one-half  of  the  community.  Under  such  circumstances  the  law  can- 
not be  enforced,  because  it  requires  the  co-operation  of  a  very  large  number 
of  persons;  and  where  those  doubts  exist,  or  where  the  denial  is  positively 
made,  constables  will  not  arrest,  witnesses  will  not  give  evidence,  and  juries 
will  not  convict.  Unfortunately,  those  of  the  community  who  are  very  scrup- 
ulous in  rsspect  to  their  moral  conduct,  and  who  are  inclined  strongly  to  be 
law-abiding  men,  and  would  therefore  be  the  safest  persons  to  sell  liquor 
— if  any  persons  could  be  safe  in  such  a  charge — they,  out  of  self-respect, 


APPENDIX.  315 

will  abandon  the  business,  and  it  falls  into  the  hands  of  the  unscrupulous,  and 
of  those  who  defy  the  laws.  I  am  of  the  opinion  that  any  criminal  law  which 
cannot  be  enforced,  weakens  the  efficacy  of  the  other  branches  of  criminal 
law.  If  you  will  permit  me  to  use  a  professional  illustration,  I  would  say  that 
no  good  instructor  lays  down  a  rule  of  discipline  in  his  establishment  which 
he  thinks  that  he  cannot  enforce,  or  is  doubtful  whether  he  can  or  not,  because 
he  knows  that  the  existence  of  such  a  rule,  if  not  enforced,  would  shake  his 
authority,  and  lead  those  under  his  care  to  despise  and  neglect  other  laws.  I 
am  of  the  opinion,  decidedly,  as  a  moralist,  and  a  political  economist,  that 
criminal  legislation  should  be  restricted  within  the  narrowest  possible  limits. 
It  is  not  enough  to  say  that  a  thing  is  wrong  to  justify  you  in  making  a  law 
for  the  punishment  of  it.  You  must  be  sure,  not  only  that  the  act  is  wrong, 
but  that  it  is  in  your  power  to  suppress  the  act,  otherwise  your  law  will  do 
more  harm  than  good.  I  am  confirmed  to  some  extent  in  this  opinion,  by 
some  limited  opportunities  for  observation  in  other  countries  besides  our  own. 
I  have  at  different  times  resided,  perhaps,  for  six  months  in  Italy,  and  six 
months  in  France,  and  it  so  happened,  to  the  best  of  my  present  recollection 
and  belief,  that  I  never  saw  a  drunken  person  in  either  of  those  countries, 
yet  the  use  of  wine  there  may  be  said  to  be  universal.  A  person  no  more 
thinks  of  taking  his  dinner  without  some  of  the  cheap,  light  wines  of  the 
country  on  his  table,  than  he  thinks  of  eating  meat  without  bread.  And 
because  the  use  and  sale  of  liquor  are  not  forbidden,  the  places  at  which  it 
is  sold  are  under  strict  observation  and  surveillance  by  the  police ;  and, 
although  I  have  had  but  limited  means  of  observation  in  that  respect,  yet 
what  I  could  see,  led  me  to  believe  that  those  places  were  very  well  regulated, 
and  that  the  persons  who  kept  them  were  the  first  to  call  in  the  aid  of  the 
police  if  one  of  their  customers  became  uproarious  in  any  way,  or  was  in  any 
manner  the  cause  of  disturbance.  It  appeared  to  me  that  the  shops  for  the 
sale  of  liquor,  judging  from  the  exterior,  were  about  as  well  regulated  as  the 
shops  for  the  sale  of  dry  goods.  I  have  always  hoped  that  we  might  become, 
in  this  country,  a  -vine-growing  and  a  wine-using  people.  I  suppose  that 
there  is  no  difficulty  in  obtaining  pure  American  wines  at  the  present  day. 
If  they  could  be  very  much  cheapened,  I  think  the  vice  of  intemperance 
would  be  very  much  diminished  ;  for  I  judge  from  the  observations  of  others, 
and  to  a  limited  extent  from  my  own,  that  the  effect  of  those  light  wines  is  to 
quench  thirst,  while  the  effect  of  stronger  wines  and  of  spirituous  liquors  is 
to  create  thirst. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  think  that  there  are  any  families  in  Cam- 
bridge without  liquors  in  their  houses  ? 

A.     I  really  cannot  answer  the  question. 

Q.     Do  you  think  there  are  any  without  bread  ? 

A.     I  should  hope  not. 

Q.  Do  you,  then,  speak  literally,  when  you  say  that  you  think  liquor  could 
be  found  in  more  places  than  bread  in  Cambridge  ? 

A.  I  meant  by  that  that  you  could  buy  liquor  in  more  places  than  you 
could  buy  bread,  not  that  it  was  so  commonly  found  in  the  possession  oi 
individuals. 


816  APPENDIX. 

Q.  What  is  the  theory  of  our  government  in  regard  to  the  law-making 
power  ?  Does  it  rest  with  the  minority  or  with  the  majority  ? 

A.  Our  theory  is  that  it  rests  exclusively  with  the  majority.  Unfortunately 
our  practice  is  the  same.  It  is  a  great  misfortune. 

Q.  The  theory  and  practice  is,  that  the  law-making  power  rests  with  the 
majority,  and  that  is  our  great  misfortune  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  could  not  qualify  the  remark  without  entering  into  a  long 
dissertation  upon  the  subject. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  it  the  duty  of  the  minority,  in  a  country  like  this,  to 
submit  to  the  laws  which  in  theory  and  in  practice  the  majority  have  the  right 
to  make  ? 

A.  Civil  laws,  yes ;  criminal  laws,  when  they  go  against  the  conscience 
and  what  we  regard  as  the  higher  law — the  law  of  God — no. 

Q.  Do  you  think  a  law  of  a  police  character,  like  that  which  would  remove 
the  open  sale  of  liquors  as  a  beverage,  is  a  law  which  goes  against  any  man's 
conscience  ? 

A.  There  is  a  difference  between  going  against  the  conscience  and  being 
supported  by  the  conscience.  I  should  say,  generally,  that  it  was  wrong  to 
make  an  act  criminal  by  law  which  was  not  condemned  by  conscience. 

Q.  My  question  is :  Is  it  the  duty  of  the  minority  to  submit  to  the  laws 
under  a  popular  government  like  our  own,  which  the  majority,  in  accordance 
with  their  right,  have  made  ? 

A.  The  word  "minority"  is  a  word  of  very  uncertain  significance.  It 
may  mean  six  persons,  or  it  may  mean  six  persons  less  than  one-half  of  the 
whole  community. 

Q.     Let  it  mean,  if  you  please,  just  one  less  ? 

A.  Then  I  doubt  whether  it  it  the  duty  of  the  community  to  consider  that 
as  a  crime  which  only  one  person  more  than  the  minority  of  the  community 
declares  to  be  a  crime.  It  would  be  much  safer  for  a  man  to  trust  to  his  own 
conscience  rather  than  to  trust  to  a  majority  of  one. 

Q.     Suppose,  instead  of  conscience,  it  were  appetite  that  rebelled  ? 

A.     Of  course  the  appetite  should  submit  to  conscience  ? 

Q.  May  not  a  moderate  drinker — one  not  quite  a  drunkard — mistake  the 
pleadings  of  appetite  for  the  pleadings  of  conscience  ? 

A .     Unquestionably. 

Q.  You  spoke  about  the  traffic,  under  such  a  law  as  we  now  have,  falling 
into  unscrupulous  hands,  because  there  are  men  who  will  sell  contrary  to  law. 
Do  you  not  therein  say  that  a  man  who  will  not  obey  the  law  is  unscrupulous  ? 

A.  I  spoke  in  regard  to  that  class  of  the  community  whose  consciences  are 
so  nice  that  they  would  avoid  the  least  shadow  of  offence,  and  who,  of  course, 
are  the  best  persons  to  be  trusted  with  the  sale  of  liquor,  if  any  persons  are 
to  be  trusted. 

Q.  Suppose  a  license  law  should  be  enacted  which  should  give  discrimina- 
tion to  the  towns  and  municipalities,  and  certain  towns  should  vote  not  to 
tolerate  the  sale  at  all,  do  you  think  that  those  towns  would  suffer  any  evil 
from  that  action  ? 

A.  It  would  depend  upon  the  circumstances ;  upon  the  amount  of  popula- 
tion and  the  comparative  number  of  dissentients. 


APPENDIX.  317 

Q.  Suppose  they  were  unanimous,  and  that  they  should  unanimously  and 
gladly  submit  to  the  prohibition  ? 

A.  Then  of  course  prohibition  would  be  useless,  because  no  one  would  be 
tempted  to  buy  liquor  under  such  circumstances. 

Q.  Then  can  a  license  for  the  sale  of  liquor  as  a  beverage  be  for  the 
public  good,  resting  on  its  merits  ? 

A.     Not  in  that  case. 

Q.  Can  it  be  in  any  case,  resting  upon  its  merits,  and  aside  from  public 
opinion  ? 

A.    I  hardly  understand  the  point  of  the  question. 

Q.  Many  people  in  our  community  desire  to  have  liquor  as  a  beverage ; 
would  it  be  an  evil  upon  this  community  if  the  sale  of  liquor  were  to  be 
suppressed. 

A.  I  suppose  not.  It  is,  however,  a  question  for  physicians  and  physiolo- 
gists to  answer,  how  great  are  its  uses  in  medicine  or  for  hygienic  purposes. 

Q.     I  merely  included  liquor  as  a  beverage. 

A.  Even  as  a  beverage  I  know  that  it  is  very  frequently  ordered  by 
physicians. 

Q.     Medicinally  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  as  a  tonic. 

Q.  In  theory,  are  you  opposed  to  the  moderate  use  of  alcoholic  beverages, 
simply  as  such,  by  men  in  health  ? 

A.  I  am  opposed  to  the  indiscriminate  use  of  ardent  spirits  ;  for  reasons 
already  given  I  am  in  favor  of  the  use  of  light  and  cheap  wines  and  malt 
liquors. 

Q.  Upon  account  of  the  alcohol  they  contain,  or  upon  account  of  their 
nutritive  properties,  aside  from  the  alcoholic  ? 

A.  For  neither  of  these  reasons.  Judging  from  their  practical  effect,  it 
seems  to  me  that  the  indiscriminate  use  of  ardent  spirits  is  bad.  The  prac- 
tical effect,  judging  from  my  own  observations  of  the  use  of  light  wines  and 
malt  liquors,  is  good. 

Q.  Do  fermented  liquors  of  any  kind  minister  to  the  human  system  in  any 
way? 

A.     You  must  ask  one  who  is  a  better  physiologist  than  I.     I  can  only  say 
that  my  physician  has  recommended  the  use  of  them  to  me,  although  I  have  • 
followed  his  advice  to  a  very  limited  extent. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  not  seeing  any  intoxicated  persons  abroad,  and  yet  you 
spoke  of  uproarious  persons  being  taken  into  custody. 

A .  I  said  that  I  had  never  seen  an  instance  of  uproarious  persons  at  those 
drinking  shops,  and  I  was  told  that  the  reason  was,  that  if  there  should  be 
any  such  disturbance,  the  aid  of  the  police  would  be  immediately  called  in, 
and  therefore  such  occurrences  were  comparatively  unknown. 

Q.     How  many  drunken  men  have  you  seen  here,  within  six  months  ? 

A.  I  could  not  give  you  the  exact  number.  I  can  only  say,  that  I  have 
seen  them  frequently  within  the  last  month.  Day  before  yesterday  I  saw  a 
man  so  drunk  that  he  was  obliged  to  sit  down  in  a  door-way. 

Q.     Was  that  in  Boston,  or  in  Cambridge  ? 

A.     That  was  in  Boston,  but  I  also  see  them  frequently  in  Cambridge. 


318  APPENDIX.' 

Q.  You  spoke,  by  way  of  illustration,  of  the  laws  given  to  pupils.  As  9 
matter  of  fact,  docs  the  board  of  government,  of  which  you  are  a  member, 
repeal  all  laws  which  are  not  obeyed  by  the  students  ? 

A.  The  practical  government,  the  Faculty,  wish  to ;  those  who  arc  not 
so  well  acquainted  with  the  business  of  education  as  the  Faculty  are 
sometimes  unwilling  to  consent  to  such  a  repeal. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  a  law  to  be  repealed  from  your  code  because  it 
was  not  enforced  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  name  the  incident  ? 

A .  The  law  against  playing  cards,  which  it  was  impossible  to  enforce  ;  the 
law  about  theatrical  entertainments,  which,  I  think,  however,  is  not  repealed, 
but  exists  in  a  modified  form.  It  was  very  considerably  modified,  because  it 
was  found  inoperative. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  FAY.)  You  spoke  of  finding  so  little  intemperance  abroad, 
and  yet  you  say  that  wines  are  generally  used  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  then  do  you  account  for  so  little  intemperance  if  wines  are 
generally  used  ? 

A.  The  use  of  those  light  wines  quenches  thirst  without  causing  intoxica- 
tion ;  therefore,  persons  do  not  seek  for  stronger  wines  and  distilled  spirits 
which  cause  intoxication. 

Q.  Suppose  the  use  of  wine  here  was  as  general  as  it  is  there,  could  the 
same  quality  of  wine  be  found  in  sufficient  quantities  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  light  Catawba  wines  from  Ohio,  and  the  light  wines 
from  California,  are  as  good,  and  even  better  than  the  light  wines  in  common 
use  in  France  and  Italy.  Unfortunately,  the  Ohio  and  California  wines  are 
as  yet,  comparatively  dear.  In  Italy  and  in  France,  a  bottle  of  those  light 
wines  can  be  bought  for  about  ten  cents. 

Q.  Then  those  who  would  use  wine  here,  are  compelled  to  use  something 
different  from  the  wine  used  in  Europe  ? 

A.  Not  entirely.  The  lighter  Italian  wines  arc,  to  some  extent,  imported 
and  used  here.  I  know  some  gentlemen  in  Cambridge  who  have  imported  at 
different  times,  several  casks  of  choice  light  wines  raised  in  the  vicinity  of 
Naples,  and  as  the  wines  were  imported  directly  from  Naples,  I  have  no  doubt 
of  their  essential  purity. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  I  would  like  you  to  state,  as  briefly  as  you  can, 
and  in  general  terms,  your  views  of  the  drinking  usages  of  society,  connected 
with  the  sale  of  liquors,  as  bearing  upon  the  great  subject  of  political  economy, 
or  if  you  please,  upon  the  growth  and  wealth  of  a  community. 

A.  Unquestionably,  intemperance  is  destructive  of  the  economical 
resources  of  the  community ;  concerning  laws  prohibiting  the  sale  of  liquor, 
what  effect  they  would  have,  is  another  subject. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EEV.  THEODORE  EDSON,  D.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  and  what  is  your  occupation  ? 
A.    I  am  a  clergyman  and  reside  in  Lowell. 
Q.     Of  what  denomination  ? 


APPENDIX.  319 

A .    Episcopal. 

Q.  Do  your  labors  bring  you  very  much  in  contact  with  the  poor,  and 
enable  you  to  observe  the  condition  of  the  lower  classes  ? 

A.     They  do,  extensively. 

Q.  What  is  the  state  of  things,  in  regard  to  intemperance  now,  as 
compared  with  what  it  was  twenty  years  ago. 

A.  Judging  from  my  own  observation,  I  think  that  there  is  more  intem- 
perance now  than  then. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  liquor  is,  or  is  not,  publicly  sold  in  the  city  of  Lowell  ? 

A.  I  think  that  it  is  sold  freely.  I  do  not  know  hoAv  extensive  the  sale  is, 
but  my  opinion  is  that  liquor  can  be  obtained  very  readily. 

Q.  I  would  inquire  whether  you  have  formed  any  opinion  from  facts 
which  have  come  under  your  own  observation,  as  to  the  effect  of  the  present 
prohibitory  law  in  checking  intemperance  ?  . 

A.  It  is  a  subject  in  which  I  was  a  good  deal  interested,  and  which  I  ex- 
amined closely  at  the  time  of  the  enactment  of  the  law,  and  its  going  into 
effect  in  our  city.  My  opinion  then  was,  and  now  is,  that  its  tendency  has 
been  to  increase  drunkenness. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  as  to  the  most  effective  means  of  promoting 
temperance  ? 

A.  I  think  that  religious  principles  and  truths  are  altogether  the  most 
efficient. 

Q.  What,  in  your  opinion,  is  the  effect  of  prohibitory  laws  upon  the  effi- 
ciency of  moral  means.  Does  prohibitory  legislation  aid  or  retard  the  moral 
agencies  employed  for  the  suppression  of  intemperance. 

A.  I  am  hardly  able  to  answer  that.  I  think  that  the  prohibitory  law,  so 
far  as  my  observation  goes,  has  had  a  tendency  to  increase  drunkenness,  but 
whether  religious  principles  are  so  strongly,  or  so  effectively  urged  or  not,  I 
am  not  able  to  say.  For  my  own  part,  I  depend  more  upon  religious  princi- 
ples, and  the  appeal  to  religious  feeling,  than  on  the  statute. 

Q.  Are  the  moral  means  now  employed — such  as  addresses,  lectures,  &c. — 
less  or  greater  in  number  than  they  were  ten  or  fifteen  years  ago  ? 

A.  It  appears  to  me  that  there  has  been  less  of  such  means  employed 
than  formerly. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  As  a  general  theory,  would  your  church,  as  a 
church,  keep  all  questions  of  regulation,  so  far  at  least  as  social  duties  and 
general  regulation  of  conduct  are  concerned,  within  its  own  hand,  rather  than 
remit  such  regulation  in  any  way  to  the  State  ? 

A.  Our  theory  is  to  obey  the  law,  and  we  hold  it  to  be  our  duty  to  teach 
our  children  to  obey  the  law. 

Q.     You  are  a  minority  in  the  country  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Would  you,  as  a  matter  of  church  theory, — as  a  matter  of  polity, — if 
you  were  numerous,  and  in  the  majority,  regard  these  duties  as  duties  properly 
interfered  with  by  law  ? 

A .  In  this  country,  where  there  is  no  established  religion,  I  do  not  think 
that  the  church  would  be  forward  to  appeal  to  the  State  in  the  matter. 


820  APPENDIX. 

Q.  As  a  general  theory,  your  church  is  opposed  to  appeals  to  the  State  for 
any  aid  in  such  cases  ? 

A.    I  do  not  understand  your  question  fully. 

Q.  My  question  was,  whether  in  general,  resting  alone  upon  your  church 
polity,  you  would  invoke  the  aid  of  the  State  at  all,  in  regard  to  these  general 
matters  ? 

A.  We  seek  protection  as  do  other  persuasions;  we  are  bound  to  sus- 
tain the  laws  of  the  country,  but  we  do  not  connect  our  ecclesiastical  rules 
with  the  statute. 

Q.  You  regard  this  as  a  concession,  under  the  state  of  things  in  this 
country  ?  Does  it  grow  out  of  the  genius  of  your  church  polity,  or  is  it  a 
concession  to  the  existing  state  of  things  in  this  country  ? 

A.  I  think  that  our  church  has  no  greater  affinity  for  an  established 
religion  than  any  other. 

Q.  My  question  is  understood  a  little  more  broadly  than  I  intended.  I 
intended  to  ask,  not,  whether  you  desired  an  established  religion,  but  whether 
the  genius  of  your  church  government  recognizes  the  need  of  the  aid  of  the 
law  in  the  management  of  social  evils  ? 

A.     Perhaps  not  in  the  enforcement  of  moral  or  religious  duties. 

Q.  My  question  is  a  little  broader  than  that  and  referring  to  general 
social  evils. 

A.  So  far  as  that  goes,  we  adhere  to  the  government  of  the  country,  and 
teach  our  children  obedience  to  the  laws. 

Q.  I  regret  that  the  precise  point  of  the  question  does  not  appear.  My 
question  is  simply  this  :  whether,  resting  upon  your  church  polity,  and  follow- 
ing its  genius,  you  would  invoke  the  aid  of  the  State  in  the  suppression  of 
social  evils ;'  I  refer  more  particularly  to  such  matters  as  drunkenness,  adultery, 
gambling  ? 

A.  We  have  no  objection  to  laws  against  crime  of  any  kind,  and  we 
teach  obedience  to  them. 

Q.  But  would  you  establish  such  laws  if  the  polity  of  your  church  could 
assert  itself  ? 

A.    I  do  not  see  any  tendency  in  that  direction.    I  do  not  know. 

Q.  You  have  been  an  active  participant  in  the  labors  of  the  friends  of 
temperance,  in  the  city  of  Lowell,  for  many  years  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  Qnough  to  state  upon  what  basis,  and  in  what  form, 
you  have  labored  V 

A.  I  have  preached  upon  the  subject.  I  have  attended  and  taken  part  in 
public  meetings,  but  more  in  the  earlier  period  of  what  is  called  the  reforma- 
tion, than  recently. 

Q.  Your  own  basis  of  action,  was  the  exclusion  of  distilled  liquors 
alone  ? 

A.    My  memory  does  not  quite  serve  me,  to  answer  that. 

Q.  Has  it  been  your  practice  of  late  to  affiliate  with  those  who  take  the 
ground  of  total  abstinence  ? 

A.  I  have  not  attended  the  public  meetings  since  that  position  was 
assumed. 


APPENDIX.  321 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  B.  F.  CLARK. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Will  you  state  any  conclusions  that  you  may  have 
formed,  from  your  own  observations,  in  regard  to  the  subject  of  intemperance  ? 

A.  My  manner  of  life  in  respect  to  temperance,  is,  I  suppose,  very  well 
known  to  you,  since  the  year  that  we  both  lived  in  Lowell,  and  when  you  and 
others  were  very  actively  engaged  in  using  what  I  regarded  as  appropriate 
means  of  carrying  forward  the  temperance  reform,  which,  I  assert,  was  in  a 
very  much  better  condition  then  than  it  is  now. 

Q.     How  much  better  ? 

A.  It  was  better  in  this  respect :  I  believe  the  laws  then  in  force  were  suc- 
cessfully used  to  promote  the  temperance  cause.  From  a  very  careful  inves- 
tigation of  this  subject,  and  from  conversations  with  men  who  have  the  means 
of  knowing  of  what  they  speak,  I  believe  that  a  very  much  larger  proportion 
of  the  inhabitants  of  Lowell  at  that  time,  abstained  from  the  use  of  intoxicat- 
ing drinks,  than  now.  Then,  side-boards  were  generally  laid  aside ;  now  they 
are  common.  Then,  the  upper  classes  of  society  did  not  pass  wine  around  at 
their  parties  ;  now  they  generally  do.  I  believe  that  those  were  emphatically 
years  of  promise.  I  became  a  prohibitionist  by  adopting  what  I  now  consider 
to  be  an  erroneous  opinion : — that  a  prohibitory  law  would  stop  the  sale  of 
intoxicating  drinks,  and  thereby  remove  the  evils  of  intemperance. 

Q.     What,  in  your  observation,  has  been  the  effect  of  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  effect  of  the  prohibitory  law  has  been  disastrous  to  the 
cause  of  temperance.  I  believe  the  law  has  proved  a  failure,  because  I  find  tha 
the  habit  of  excessive  drinking  is  unabated,  and,  in  many  places,  those  habits 
are  increasing  among  the  poorer  classes  and  among  the  young.  I  find,  also,  from 
careful  observation,  that  the  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks  is  not  abated  nor  essen- 
tially lessened  ;  that  the  sales  by  open  retail  under  the  license  law,  are  now  more 
than  made  up  by.  sales  to  families,  and  sales  to  drinking-clubs  ;  so  that  the 
amount  of  actual  drinking  and  drunkenness,  the  suppression  of  which  was 
aimed  at  by  the  law,  has  not  decreased.  If  by  law  we  prohibit  entirely  the  sale 
of  intoxicating  drinks,  but  find  that  liquor  is  still  sold  and  used,  that  drunken- 
ness does  not  diminish,  I  claim  that  such  a  law  has  proved  a  failure. 

Q.  Under  your  own  observation,  is  there  far  more  intemperance  or  less ; 
far  greater  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  or  less,  than  there  was-  at  the  time  of 
which  you  spoke  ? 

A.  From  my  own  observations,  and  from  what  I  have  learned  from  others, 
on  inquiry,  I  believe  that  there  is  more  ;  and  I  believe  that  we  are  fast  going 
back  to  the  habits  of  our  fathers,  in  regard  to  the  use  of  intoxicating  drinks. 

Q.  What  is  the  fact,  since  the  operation  of  the  prohibitory  law,  in  regard 
to  the  use  of  moral  means  in  effecting  a  temperance  reform  ? 

A.  When  this  law  came  into  operation  in  1855, 1  was  actively  engaged, 
and  I  know  that  moral  means  were  generally  laid  aside.  I  know  that  we 
had  been  accustomed  to  having  frequent  lectures  on  temperance  in  our  place ; 
they  were  discontinued,  and  we  ceased  to  circulate  temperance  literature  as 
we  had  done  previously.  There  was  then  a  general  feeling  that  the  law  was 
a  machine  by  which  the  work  was  to  be  done. 

Q.  Since  that  time,  within  the  sphere  of  your  observation,  such  efforts 
have  greatly  diminished  ? 

N  41 


322  APPENDIX. 

A.  They  were  greatly  diminished,  but,  mthin  a  year  or  two,  have  been 
revived. 

Q.  What  is  the  present  condition  of  the  temperance  reform,  promoted  by 
such  means,  compared  with  what  it  used  to  be  ? 

A.  The  interest  in  the  subject  is  reviving,  but  in  a  different  form.  There 
is  now  a  division ;  the  temperance  people  are  divided  and  arrayed  against 
each  other ;  and  those  who  are  now  active  temperance  men  are  exceedingly 
denunciatory  towards  those  who  do  not  come  fully  up  to  their  level. 

Q.  So  far  as  you  are  able  to  judge,  are  the  temperance  people  throughout 
the  Commonwealth  generally  united,  or  divided  ? 

A.  They  are  divided.  Men  who  were  then  actively  engaged  in  the  tem- 
perance cause,  because  they  cannot  adopt  all  the  measures  of  those  who  now 
take  the  lead  in  this  matter,  have  ceased  to  go  with  them.  Personally,  I  have 
never  done  so  much  for  the  cause  of  total  abstinence  ;  never  worked  so  system- 
atically through  the  children  and  young  people,  as  during  the  last  three  or 
four  years  ;  but  I  have  ceased  to  act  with  others  with  whom  I  formerly  acted. 

Q.     Is  liquor  now  sold  in  your  town  ;  or  is  the  law  enforced  ? 

A.  In  our  village — North  Chelmsford — there  is  now  no  place  where  it  is 
openly  sold.  There  was  a  tavern  kept  there ;  a  man  hired  a  place  for  a  year, 
but  was  not  the  right  sort  of  a  man  in  the  opinion  of  the  neighborhood,  and 
left  a  month  ago,  and  that  house  is  now  shut  up.  I  am  credibly  informed 
that  liquor  is  sold  in  our  village  in.  private  houses.  I  have  heard  of  three  or 
four  different  places  where  it  is  sold,  and  I  have  reason  to  believe  that  it  is 
brought  in  there  very  freely  in  wagons  and  sleighs,  and  used  or  sold  privately. 

Q.     What  is  the  population  of  your  village  ? 

A.     About  seven  hundred. 

Q.     How  is  it  in  other  portions  of  the  town  ? 

A.    I  understand  that  in  the  centre  of  the  town  it  is  not  sold. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  spoke  of  moral  efforts  having  been  abated 
when  this  law  was  enacted  ? 

A.    I  did. 

Q.     Did  such  abatement  commence  directly  on  the  passage  of  the  law  ? 

A.  So  far  as  my  recollection  now  goes,  it  commenced  before  this  law 
passed.  This  law  passed  in  1852  ;  the  prohibitory  law  of  Maine  was  passed 
in  1848,  and  we  then  began  to  talk  about  having  it  in  this  State.  The  abate, 
ment  commenced  about  the  time  that  the  Maine  Law  was  enacted,  and  we 
began  to  talk  about  similar  legislation  in  our  own  Commonwealth. 

Q.     Are  you  sure  that  the  Maine  Law  was  passed  in  1848  V 

A.    I  have  been  told  that  1848  was  the  year. 

Q.    I  am  quite  sure  that  it  was  passed  in  1850. 

A.     And  /  am  quite  sure  that  it  was  passed  in  1848. 

Q.  Did  not  this  relaxation  of  moral  effort  commence  a  good  while  before 
that? 

A.    No,  sir ;  it  did  not  commence  until  we  began  to  talk  about  prohibition. 

Q.    Did  we  not  talk  about  prohibition  a  good  while  before  that  ? 

A.     Not  in  this  form. 

Q.  But  do  you  not  know  that  prohibition  was  attempted  a  great  many 
years  before  that  ? 


APPENDIX.  323 

A.  I  know  that  in  1840  licenses  were  withheld  very  generally  throughout 
the  State.  The  withholding  of  licenses  was  a  kind  of  prohibition,  but  it  was 
not  satisfactory  to  the  prohibitionists,  and  they  began  to  talk  about  a  real 
prohibitory  law. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  the  law,  in  many  places  in  this  State,  was  more 
thoroughly  prohibitory  than  the  present,  inasmuch  as  it  did  not  permit  the  sale 
of  ardent  spirits  for  medicine  or  for  the  arts  ?  Don't  you  know  that  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.    What  more  thorough  law  of  prohibition  could  you  have  than  that  ? 

A.     It  was  prohibitory  in  that  case. 

Q.     Was  it  not  in  every  case  ? 

A .     It  was  a  very  weak  law. 

Q.     But  was  it  not  strongly  prohibitory  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  because  licenses  were  not  universally  withheld  throughout  the 
State  at  any  one  time. 

Q.     They  were  withheld  in  Boston  ? 

A.     They  were,  but  liquor-selling  went  on  all  the  time. 

Q.     Was  not  the  law  then  prohibitory  in  Boston  ? 

A.    Indirectly,  by  the  withholding  of  licenses  it  was  prohibitory. 

Q.  The  people  refused  to  give  licenses ;  therefore  the  effect  of  their  action 
was  prohibitive  ? 

A.     I  grant  that. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Was  not  the  burden  of  our  discussion,  from  1844  to 
1848,  the  necessity  of  a  law  conforming  to  the  conditions  of  the  present  law  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  not  at  so  early  a  period.  I  remember  very  well  when  Mr. 
Spooner  came  to  our  place  and  spoke  in  opposition  to  a  prohibitory  law.  I 
heard  him  make  some  very  eloquent  speeches  on  the  subject. 

Mr.  SPOONER.  It  was  in  1843  or  1844  that  I  became  an  advocate  of 
prohibition. 

A.  You  did  not  advocate  it  when  you  came  to  our  town.  I  remember 
that  you  spoke  very  eloquently  against  it 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  claim  that  when  this  prohibitory  law  was 
passed  that  there  was  a  relaxation  of  moral  effort  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  and  before  the  law  was  passed  in  this  State. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  directly  after  the  Washingtonian  movement, 
moral  efforts  were  relaxed,  if  not  suspended,  to  a  great  degree,  and  that  since 
that  time  ministers  have  scarcely  preached  upon  the  subject  of  temperance, 
until  very  recently  V 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  fact,  but  I  do  know  the  fact  that  I  have  stated.  I 
can  clearly  trace  the  laying  aside  of  moral  means  to  the  talk  of  prohibition. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  the  examination  before  the  Legislature,  two  years 
ago? 

A.    I  do,  very  distinctly. 

Q.  What  period  did  the  testimony  then  offered,  show  to  be  the  highest 
point  of  temperance  ? 

A.    Between  1845  and  1850. 

Q.     Did  not  Mr.  Child  say,  that  in  his  judgment,  it  was  about  1845  ? 


324  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  have  forgotten  that.  I  recollect  that  in  comparing  the  testimony,  the 
Committee  said  that  it  culminated  between  1845  and  1850. 

Q.     Was  liquor  sold  in  1845  and  1848,  in  the  town  where  you  now  reside  ? 

A.     It  has  been  sold  ever  since  I  have  been  there,  and  is  sold  there  now. 

Q.     Was  there  an  open  sale  there  ? 

A-  We  have,  as  we  supposed,  at  several  different  times,  stopped  the  open 
sale  of  liquor  in  that  town.  We  did  not,  however,  suppress  drunkenness,  for 
•we  are  very  near  to  Lowell,  and  it.  would  be  brought  in  from  there  and  sold  in 
large  quantities. 

Q.     How  was  the  sale  stopped  for  those  short  periods  ? 

A.    By  prosecutions 

TESTIMONY  OF  II.  W.  B.  WIGHTMAN. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.     In  North  Chelmsford. 

Q.     What  is  your  business  ? 

A.     I  am  Treasurer  of  the  Chelmsford  Foundry  Company. 

Q.     You  have  a  large  number  of  men  in  your  employ  ? 

A.  We  have  employed  from  seventy-five  to  two  hundred  men  in  our 
foundry  during  the  last  sixteen  years  ? 

Q.  What  has  been  your  observation  in  regard  to  the  working  of  the 
prohibitory  liquor  law  ? 

A.  I  was  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law  for  quite  a  number  of  years,  until 
I  found  that  for  some  reason  it  was  inoperative.  For  the  last  two  or  three 
years  I  have  been  in  doubt  as  to  its  practicability.  So  far  as  the  sale  of 
liquor  to  our  men  is  concerned,  I  do  not  think  that  it  has  diminished  at  all. 
The  nature  of  the  business  is  such,  that  for  years  past  the  proprietors  of 
foundries  have  been  accustomed  to  furnish  their  men  with  a  certain  amount 
of  liquor.  I  recollect  very  distinctly,  that  in  my  earlier  days  it  was  always 
customary  to  give  to  each  man  who  worked  in  a  foundry  a  half-pint  of  liquor 
per  day,  and  charge  him  with  the  balance  used.  Some  of  the  old  men  who 
are  employed,  and  who  have  been  there  for  over  a  quarter  of  a  century,  still 
continue  their  habitual  use  of  liquor.  They  drink  it  regularly,  and,  as  far  as 
their  appearance  is  concerned,  I  cannot  see  that  the  habit  grows  upon  them. 
Some  of  the  young  men  who  are  in  the  foundry,  and  who  were  in  the  army, 
I  think  contracted  the  habit  there,  because  I  know  that  many  of  them  were 
formerly  members  of  temperance  societies,  and  some  of  them  had  taken  the 
pledge.  Not  only  have  those  who  were  in  the  army  contracted  the  habit  of 
drinking,  but  some  of  their  companions  who  were  not  in  the  war  have  also 
become  addicted  to  the  use  of  liquor  within  the  last  year  or  two.  I  think  that 
there  has  been  no  difficulty  at  all  in  procuring  liquor.  It  may  not  always  be 
obtained  in  our  place,  but  Lowell  is  but  three  and  a  half  miles  distant,  and 
there  are  ample  facilities  for  procuring  liquor  from  either  Lowell  or  Boston. 
I  think  that  the  habit  of  drinking  has  not  diminished. 

Q.     Has  it  increased  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know,  so  far  as  the  number  of  men  are  concerned,  that  it  has 
'  increased ;  but  among  the  class  of  whom  I  spoke — the  young  men  who  were 
in  the  army,  and  their  companions — I  think  that  there  has  been  an  increase. 


APPENDIX.  325 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  compare  the  social  habits  of  families,  as 
they  were  twenty  years  ago,  with  the  social  habits  of  the.  people  of  the  present 
time? 

A.  I  think  that  wines  and  liquors  are  used  more  universally  now  than  they 
were  twenty  years  ago,  although  I  never  have  it  passed  to  me.  I  never  took 
a  glass  of  intoxicating  liquor  as  a  beverage  in  my  life. 

Q.     Are  there  any  public  places  in  your  town  where  liquor  is  sold  ? 

A.  I  have  no  knowledge  except  by  public  report,  but  I  think  that  there 
are  two  or  three  places  where  liquor  can  be  procured. 

Q.  Are  those  places  known  to  be  public  ?  Docs  everybody  know  where 
they  are? 

A.     I  think  that  anybody  who  desires  liquor  can  obtain  it. 

Q.     What  is  your  knowledge  as  to  the  private  or  secret  sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.  Some  three  or  four  months  ago,  one  of  our  men  became  intoxicated  by 
procuring  liquor  in  the  village,  and  the  day  before  Thanksgiving,  fell,  with  his 
face  in  a  brook,  and  was  found  next  morning,  frozen  to  death.  The  State 
Constabulary  were  asked  to  come  to  the  place,  and  shut  up  certain  places  that 
were  mentioned  ;  they  did  not  come  at  that  time,  but  a  month  or  six  weeks 
afterwards,  one  of  the  State  Constabulary  was  there,  and  so  far  as  the  open 
sale  was  concerned  in  one  or  two  of  those  places  I  think  it  was  discontinued. 

Q.     Have  any  other  places  sprung  up  in  place  of  those  suppressed  ? 

A.  I  think  not.  Mr.  Clark  mentioned  a  tavern-keeper  who  was  com- 
plained of  two  or  three  months  ago.  The  temperance  people  thought  that 
they  had  witnesses  who  would  be  sure  to  convict  him,  but  I  believe  that  not 
one  of  the  witnesses  who  were  called  testified  that  they  had  procured  liquor  of 
him,  and  he  was  discharged.  There  were  three  or  four  men  connected  with 
the  foundry  who  were  witnesses  in  that  case. 

TESTIMONY  or  REV.  B.  F.  CLARK,  (  continued.') 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)  How  long  have  you  been  publicly  engaged  in 
this  effort  to  procure  a  license  law  ? 

A.  My  first  public  effort  was  made  three  years  ago  last  June.  For  the  last 
three  years  I  have  issued  a  yearly  message  to  the  people  for  the  purpose  of 
bringing  the  people  up  to  that,  standard,  and  have  been  here  before  the 
legislature. 

Q.     Are  you  a  professional  license-seeker  ? 

A .     What  do  you  mean  by  "  professional  ?  " 

Q.    You  have  followed  it  up  pretty  steadily  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir,  and  I  intend  to  follow  it  up  until  I  accomplish  the  end. 

Q.     Are  you  pretty  well  backed  up,  with  respect  to  funds  ? 

A.  I  will  say,  in  answer  to  that,  that  I  commenced  this  effort  entirely 
alone,  confidently  believing  that  I  could  persuade  the  public  to  come  up  to 
my  standard,  and  I  took  the  money  out  of  my  own  pocket. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  all  the  money  that  you  have  expended  in 
this  effort  has  been  taken  out  of  your  own  pocket,  or  have  friends  aided  you  ? 

A.  I  commenced  taking  the  money  out  of  my  own  pocket,  and  without 
having  a  dollar  pledged,  I  continued  doing  so,  until  I  had  expended  several 
hundred  dollars.  I  have  put  into  these  annual  messages  what  I  was  doing ; 


326  APPENDIX. 

I  have  given  my  post  office  address,  and  stated  that  those  who  were  friendly 
to  this  movement  might  furnish  me  with  funds,  if  they  saw  fit  to  do  so.  I 
have  never  called  upon  anybody  for  money,  but  different  persons  in  different 
places  have  secured  funds  for  me.  I  have  received  aid  from  a  great  variety 
of  sources. 

Q.  I  wanted  to  show,  that  you  are  under  the  natural  bias  of  a  person  who 
has  taken  up  an  object,  and  that  you  arc  pursuing  it  as  other  people  would. 

A.  That  is  a  false  inference  from  the  facts.  Never,  in  my  life,  (and  I  say 
it  with  the  solemnity  of  an  oath,)  did  I  undertake  anything  with  a  more 
self-sacrificing  spirit,  or  in  a  more  confident  belief  that  I  was  engaged  in 
doing  a  great  and  a  good  work  for  the  public.  I  have  made  sacrifices ;  one 
thousand  dollars,  placed  in  my  hand  to-day,  would  not  repay  what  I  have 
expended.  I  know  no  "  natural  bias,"  but  a  bias  for  the  truth. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  any  of  the  money  that  you  have  received  came 
from  traffickers  in  ardent  spirits  ? 

A.  I  have  said  that  any  class  of  persons  might  contribute,  and  I  will  say 
here,  that  I  am  ready  to  receive  aid  in  carrying  on  this  work  from  any  class 
of  persons,  whether  engaged  in  the  liquor  business,  or  in  any  other  business. 
I  will  receive  it  even  from  Mr.  Spooner  !  I  have  not  looked  a  gift  horse  in 
the  mouth.  Those  who  have  brought  money  to  me  were  very  respectable 
persons  indeed.  I  will  say  now  that  if  any  person  in  this  room  will  give  me 
fifty  dollars,  I  will  not  ask  him  where  he  got  it,  but  I  will  pledge  myself  to  use 
it  faithfully  in  carrying  on  this  great  work. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  J.  C.  LOVEJOY. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     You  are  a  clergyman,  I  believe  ? 

A.     I  was  for  twenty  years,  but  have  not  been  for  the  last  few  years. 

Q.  What  observations  have  you  made  in  regard  to  the  effects  of  this 
prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  In  the  autumn  of  1851  I  received  a  circular  from  some  committee  in 
Boston,  asking  me  to  go  out  and  lecture  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory  law,  similar 
to  the  Maine  Law.  I  examined  the  subject,  and  came  to  the  conclusion  that 
there  was  no  soil  in  the  community  into  which  the  tap-root  of  a  prohibitory 
law  coull  strike.  There  was  no  basis  for  such  a  law.  In  the  first  place,  I 
thought  that  I  had  no  right  to  dictate  to  another  man  what  he  should  eat  or 
what  he  should  drink.  God  had  given  each  man  the  capacity,  certainly  the 
right,  to  say  what  was  good  for  him  to  eat  and  drink,  if  he  had  any  rights  at  all. 
In  the  second  place,  there  was  one  feature  in  the  law,  which,  when  viewed  in 
the  light  of  justice,  appeared  to  me  decidedly  wrong, — absolutely  wrong ;  it 
was  the  punishment  of  one  man  for  the  sin  of  another.  Another  principle 
appeared  to  me  wrong, — that  was  the  destruction  of  property  wantonly.  The 
prohibitory  laws  pours  alcohol  upon  the  ground, — a  species  of  property  that  is 
immediately  replaced  by  the  production  of  more  alcohol.  However  adulterated 
or  impure  the  liquor  may  be,  it  can  always  be  distilled  and  saved.  If  I  looked 
to  my  own  conscience  for  a  foundation  for  this  law,  I  found  none  there ;  if 
I  looked  to  the  Scriptures,  I  found  that  this  law  was  in  direct  opposition  to  them. 
The  law  takes  it  for  granted  that  wine  is  one  of  the  intoxicating  drinks ;  that  it  is 
noxious,  and  that  therefore  it  is  a  sin  to  drink  it.  The  Old  Testament  is  full  of 


APPENDIX.  327 

blessings  upon  wine  and  corn  and  oil.  The  first  miracle  of  the  Founder  of 
Christianity  was  to  make  and  distribute  on  a  festive  occasion — a  large  quantity 
of  wine — not  less,  according  to  Trench,  than  one  hundred  and  twenty- 
eight  gallons, — alcoholic  wine — fermented  wine ;  yet  if  that  miracle  were 
to-day  repeated  in  Boston,  this  law  would  charge  the  Saviour  with  a  crime, 
and  imprison  Him.  I,  therefore,  preached  a  sermon  against  the  law,  instead 
of  in  favor  of  it,  from  this  text, — "  Moreover  the  law  entered,  that  the  offence 
might  abound."  It  is  fifteen  years  since  then,  but  this  day,  according  to  the 
testimony  given  here,  is  this  Scripture  fulfilled.  During  the  last  two  or  three 
years,  I  have  travelled  extensively  all  over  New  England,  and  I  must  say, 
that,  in  my  opinion,  this  law,  in  its  operation,  is  very  unjust  and  cruel  to  land- 
lords. A  landord  is  compelled  by  necessity  to  furnish  his  guests,  or  a  major- 
ity of  them,  with  some  kind  of  stimulants.  If  he  does  it,  he  is  seized  by  the 
law ;  if  he  does  not  do  it,  he  is  tormented  by  his  customers.  It  seems  to  me 
there  ought  to  be  some  relief  for  this  class  of  persons.  Another  reason 
why  such  a  law  should  never  have  been  enacted,  is  that  it  is  utterly  impossible 
to  enforce  it.  Two  men  were  put  in  jail,  and  allowed  molasses  as  a  ration ; 
they  saved  it  up  for  several  days,  and  then  by  means  of  a  tea-kettle,  distilled 
the  molasses  and  got  drunk.  Now  if  any  person  in  his  senses,  can  expect  to 
reduce  the  whole  community  to  closer  quarters  than  that,  "  God  must  give 
him  another  reason,  or  else  cure  me  of  mine."  It  is  impossible,  in  my  mind, 
and  utterly  undesirable.  I  consider  the  law  not  only  wrong,  but  absolutely 
wicked,  and  a  stigma  upon  the  State  as  long  as  it  is  upon  the  statute  book.  It 
censures  a  person  for  doing  just  what  Christ  daily  did,  for  He  acknowledged 
that  He  was  a  wine-bibber.  He  consecrated  it  at  His  Last  Supper  as  an  ever- 
lasting memorial  of  his  love,  and  gave  it  to  us  as  one  of  the  ingredients  of 
our  diet,  and,  as  has  been  testified  to  in  regard  to  the  European  countries,  to 
keep  us  from  getting  anything  noxious.  Of  this  I  have  no  more  doubt  than  I 
have  that  I  live. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  regard  the  Scripture  of  the  Old  Testament, 
where  a  blessing  is  pronounced  upon  the  corn,  and  wine,  and  oil,  as  an  injunc- 
tion to  profit  by  the  use  of  wine  ? 

A.  I  consider  them  all  to  be  put  upon  a  par, — that  the  wine  is  as  good  as 
the  oil,  and  the  oil  as  good  as  the  corn. 

Q.  You  think,  then,  that  Scripture  conclusively  proves  that  to  abolish 
wine  would  be  to  do  harm  ? 

A.     Just  as  much  as  to  abolish  corn. 

Q.    But  what  has  become  of  the  oil  ? 

A.     Of  what  oil? 

Q.     The  oil  of  that  text. 

A>     I  do  not  perceive  the  point;  if  there  is  one  I  cannot  see  it. 

Q.     Well,  I  do  not.     1  do  not  see  the  oil  nor  what  has  become  of  it. 

A.     I  suppose  it  is  in  Palestine  as  plentiful  as  the  wine. 

Q.  Is  it  now  a  daily  article  of  use  for  anointing  the  body,  as  it  was 
formerly  ? 

A.  Whether  it  is  or  is  not,  does  not  matter.  It  was  not  an  injunction  to 
use  it,  but  a  blessing  upon  it.  I  think  a  great  many  men  would  be  better  if 
they  were  anointed  with  it. 


328  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  perfectly  well  that  that  Scripture  is  in  no  sense  to  be 
construed  as  a  warrant  for  the  use  of  either  of  those  articles,  but  that  it  is  a 
reference  to  articles  of  common  use,  as  symbols  of  the  Divine  blessing  ? 

A.     I  know  they  were  real  blessings. 

Q.     Can  you  prove  it  from  the  Scriptures  ? 

A.     I  can,  to  my  satisfaction. 

Q.  Do  you  regard  our  Saviour's  reference,  "  Ye  cannot  serve  God  and 
mammon,"  as  a  proof  that  the  Lydian  god  of  riches  was  a  genuine  God? 

A.     Of  course  not. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  JAMES  H.  DUNCAN. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.     Haverhill. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  inform  the  Committee  whether  the  prohib- 
itory law  is  enforced  in  Haverhill,  so  far  as  open  places  aro  concerned.  Are 
there  any  open  places  ? 

A.  I  should  think  that  at  the  present  time  there  were  not  any  open  places 
in  Haverhill ;  though  from  what  I  see,  and  from  the  effects,  I  have  no  doubt 
that  there  are  a  great  many  places  where  liquors  are  privately  sold.  I  have 
very  little  personal  knowledge  of  places  where  liquor  is  sold  or  where  it  is 
drank.  My  knowledge  is  from  information  from  others  and  my  own  obser- 
vation in  passing  about  town  in  the  streets. 

Q.     Does  your  town  patronize  the  State  Agent  in  Boston  ? 

A.  I  find,  sir,  by  the  report  of  our  town  agent,  that  his  sales  amounted  to 
about  $33,000  last  year. 

Q'.     What  is  the  population  of  the  town  ? 

A.  The  population  of  the  town  is  between  eleven  and  twelve  thousand. 
I  do  not  know  exactly. 

Q.     Are  your  people  peculiarly  sick  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  they  are  as  healthy,  I  presume,  as  in  other  places  in  the 
County  of  Essex  or  in  the  State. 

Q.     Any  peculiar  epidemic  last  summer  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  During  the  past  year,  would  not  the  State  Constabulary  have  found 
places  to  close  up,  if  they  had  visited  Haverhill  ? 

A.  They  have  been  there,  as  I  understand,  and  have  closed  a  number 
of  places,  though  not  all  of  the  places  where  liquor  is  said  to  have  been  sold. 

Q-  How  is  the  fact  at  present  as  to  intemperance  or  drunkenness  in 
Haverhill  ? 

A.  My  observation  and  conviction  are  that  temperance  has  not  been  pro- 
moted by  the  prohibitory  law ;  that  the  temperance  of  our  people  is  not  so 
good  now  as  it  was  before  the  passage  of  the  law ;  and  there  were  periods 
when  I  took  a  somewhat  active  part  in  the  promotion  of  temperance,  acting 
upon  a  committee  to  prevent  the  illegal  sale  of  intoxicating  spirits  ;  and  atone 
time  we  had  almost  prevented  it  throughout  the  town.  That  was  fifteen 
years  ago,  or  perhaps  more.  I  would  state  here  that  Haverhill  labors  under 
this  disadvantage  :  that  a  person  who  had  been  in  the  habit  of  keeping  a  grog- 
shop, when  an  attempt  was  made  to  enforce  a  prohibitory  law,  went  just  over 


APPENDIX.  329 

the  State  line  into  New  Hampshire,  erected  one  or  two  buildings,  and  kept  an 
open  groggery  there  ;  so  that  any  one  by  going  a  distance  of  two  miles  and  a 
half,  could  get  a  supply ;  and  probably  a  great  deal  conies  in  from  that  source. 
The  law  in  New  Hampshire,  or  in  that  part  of  it,  I  believe  is  not  strictly 
enforced. 

Q.  What  opinions  from  your  observation  have  you  formed  in  regard  to 
the  efficacy  of  the  prohibitory  law  in  checking  intemperance  and  the  evils  that 
result  from  it  ? 

A.  I  think,  sir,  it  has  been  entirely  inoperative,  and  productive  rather  of 
mischief  than  of  good.  My  reflection  led  me  to  think  when  it  was  passed  that 
it  was  an  unwise  act,  and  I  believed  that  it  could  never  be  enforced ;  and  that, 
whenever  it  was  attempted  to  be  enforced  upon  the  large  dealers  and  the 
hotels,  it  would  produce  an  opposition  that  would  end  in  the  repeal  of  the  law, 
and  of  all  laws  on  the  subject,  and  would  create  a  feeling  of  opposition  in  the 
State  that  would  destroy  the  law  and  break  down  all  law  on  the  subject. 
That  opinion  is  grounded  on  this  conviction :  that  there  never  has  been  a 
time  when  the  majority  of  the  people  of  the  State  were  -not  in  the  habit  of 
using  some  of  these  liquors, — wine,  ale  or  beer,  which  are  prohibited  under 
this  law.  I  say  it  with  all  respect  to  the  Legislature,  that  I  do  not  believe 
that  there  ever  was  a  time  when  a  majority  of  those  who  composed  a  Legis- 
lature and  passed  a  law,  were,  in  their  individual  opinions  and  consciences, 
in  favor  of  the  law ;  and  I  believe  it  is  impossible  in  the  government  of  a  country 
like  ours,  to  execute  a  law  that  is  not  sustained  by  public  opinion.  It  was 
greatly  at  variance  with  the  habits,  and,  as  people  thought,  with  the  rights 
of  the  community,  to  include  ale  and  cider,  inasmuch  as  cider  had  been  made 
and  drank  throughout  all  the  farming  population  of  the  State  ;  and  it  is  impos- 
sible by  legislative  act  to  make  that  a  crime  which  is  not  made  a  crime  by  the 
Divine  law.  Now,  while  the  Divine  word  condemns  the  abuse  of  any  of  these 
things,  if  I  understand  it  aright,  it  does  not  prohibit  the  temperate  use  ;  and 
again,  the  law  makes  it  a  crime  in  an  expressman  to  transport  any  of  these 
articles,  and  subjects  him  to  fine  and  imprisonment,  when,  if  he  had  refused 
before  the  passage  of  this  law  to  have  carried  anything  of  the  kind,  he  would 
have  been  condemned  and  thrown  out  of  his  occupation.  I  think  it  is  impos- 
sible to  make  that  a  crime  which  is  not  made  a  crime  by  the  Divine  law. 
Then,  sir,  there  is  another  very  great  objection  to  this  prohibitory  law  ;  which 
is,  that  it  divides  the  friends  of  temperance,  and  thereby  weakens  their  efforts. 
A  few  friends  of  temperance  were  ardent  advocates  of  the  prohibitory  law,  and 
many  of  them  have  seen  fit  to  censure  and  condemn  those  who  had  previously 
acted  with  them  because  they  did  not  come  up  to  that  point.  That  is  a  well- 
known  fact ;  and  in  consequence  of  that  those  in  this  Commonwealth  who  are 
desirous  of  producing  the  best  results  in  a  great  degree  abstain  from  putting 
forth  their  efforts.  That,  sir,  I  think,  a  very  marked  reason  why  intemperance 
has  to  some  extent  prevailed.  Then  I  think  that  it  is  another  objection  to  the 
prohibitory  law,  that  it  demoralizes  the  community.  Who  believes  that  the 
thirty-three  thousand  dollars'  worth  sold  at  the  agency  in  Haverhill,  (probably 
in  very  small  quantities,  and  no  one  doubts  that  in  every  instance  this  was 
said  to  be  wanted  for  medicinal  and  mechanical  purposes,)  were  bought  for 
those  purposes  in  the  proper  meaning  of  the  terms  ?  Then  what  a  vast 
42 


330  APPENDIX. 

amount  of  lying  has  been  occasioned  through  this  agency !  Another  objection 
is  this :  there  is  a  large  class  of  men  who  call  themselves  temperance  men,  who 
sometimes  desire,  if  they  go  into  an  eating-house,  to  drink  a  glass  of  ale  ;  but 
it  creates  a  very  unpleasant  feeling  to  think  that  a  man  is  breaking  the  law, 
and  that  he  is  aiding  and  abetting  another  man  in  breaking  the  law.  I  think 
it  is  impossible  to  carry  out  this  law  until  a  change  takes  place  in  the  public 
mind,  which  I  never  expect  to  see  take  place  at  all.  I  never  expect  to  see 
the  time  when  a  majority  of  the  people  of  this  Commonwealth  will  sustain  the 
prohibitory  law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  say  that  thirty-three  thousand  dollars'  worth 
of  liquor  was  sold  by  the  State  agency  last  year  ? 

A.    It  so  appears  by  report. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  a  great  deal  of  that  is  used  in  the  mechanic 
arts? 

A.     I  should  say  so. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  proportion  of  the  alcohol  manufactured  in  this 
country  is  used  in  the  arts  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know. 

Q.     Did  you  know  that  it  was  over  half  ? 

A.     1  do  not  know  that;  I  have  no  recollection  about  it. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  that  one  manufacturing  establishment  in  Lowell  used 
one  hundred  thousand  gallons  in  a  year  ? 

A.     I  do  not,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  know  what  kinds  of  liquors  the  agent  in  your  town  sells  ? 

A.  I  have  not  examined  them.  He  keeps  a  great  variety  of  all  kinds  of 
articles  that  are  drank. 

Q.    Have  you  had  the  same  agent  a  number  of  years  ? 

A.    I  think  this  gentleman  has  been  agent  about  two  years. 

Q.     They  have  confidence  in  him  or  they  would  not  trust  him,  I  suppose  ? 

A.     lie  represents  his  liquor  to  be  an  assayed  article. 

Q.     What  is  the  population  of  your  town  ? 

A.  Between  eleven  and  twelve  thousand;  and  on  the  other  side  of  the 
river  in  Bradford  there  are  about  a  thousand  more. 

Q.    Do  you  know  what  the  sales  were  a  few  years  ago  ? 

A.     They  are  larger  this  year  than  ever  before. 

Q.     Do  you  know  the  cause  ? 

A.  The  increasing  use  of  liquor  is  attributable,  I  suppose,  to  the  increase 
of  intemperance.  I  would  mention  here  an  evil  which  is  stated  to  me.  I  do 
not  know  it  of  my  own  knowledge,  but  I  had  it  from  creditable  testimony, 
that  there  are  a  number  of  places  in  Haverhill  where  rooms  are  fitted  up  and 
furnished  and  large  numbers  of  persons  have  keys  where  they  can  go  in  and 
get  liquor. 

Q.     Does  this  agency  sell  to  other  towns  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know,  but  I  should  think  they  probably  did.  It  is  difficult  for 
an  agent  to  know  where  all  the  people  come  from  who  buy  liquor  of  him,  I 
suppose.  It  is  very  likely  that  they  do. 

Q.  Do  you  not  attribute  the  increase  of  this  sale  to  a  considerable  extent 
to  the  fact  that  the  law  has  been  pressing  upon  the  liquor-dealers  there  ? 


APPENDIX.  331 

A.  Well,  to  some  extent,  undoubtedly  ;  but  it  is  only  within,  I  think,  the 
last  two  or  three  months  that  the  State  Constabulary  have  made  seizures. 

Q.     But  they  made  prosecutions  more  than  a  year  ago  ? 

A.  There  have,  at  different  times,  been  prosecutions  there.  We  had  no 
constable  at  Haverhill,  until  within  the  last  three  or  four  months ;  and  the 
place  was  not,  I  think,  visited  by  them  until  within  the.  last  three  or  four 
months. 

Q.  Putting  all  these  together,  and  considering  the  kinds  of  liquor  sold, 
what  do  you  suppose  is  the  average  price  per  gallon  ? 

A.  I  could  not  tell.  I  have  not  had  occasion  to  go  there  to  buy  or  to 
know  anything  about  the  prices,  except  that  when  I  have  asked  the  prices, 
I  have  understood  that  they  were  very  high ;  about  three  dollars  a  gallon,  I 
believe. 

Q.     What  do  you  suppose  the  price  of  brandy  is  ? 

A.     I  have  heard  that  they  had  it  from  four  dollars  up  to  twelve. 

Q.     Would  the  prices  average  six  dollars  ? 

A.  I  should  hardly  think  so  much.  There  is  another  evil  about  this  pro- 
hibitory law,  which  I  will  just  mention  as  I  understand  it.  These  people  who 
undertake  to  sell  grog  by  the  glass  charge  about  twice  as  much  as  they  did  in 
former  times  ;  therefore  the  temptation  is  to  other  persons  to  get  small  portions 
of  liquor  and  retail  it.  I  understand  that  Irish  women  are  in  the  habit  of 
keeping  it  for  sale,  and  the  Irish  laborers  on  the  aqueduct  and  elsewhere 
know  where  to  go  and  get  it  just  when  they  please,  and  where  they  please, 
almost. 

Q.     There  has  been  a  great  increase  in  intemperance  ? 

A.  Well,  a  considerable  increase,  sir ;  our  population  has  increased,  and, 
perhaps,  it  is  more  obvious  on  that  account  than  it  would  have  been  formerly. 

Q.     Is  it  not  a  much  larger  foreign  population  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir.     The  foreign  population  has  been  increasing. 

Q.    Is  your  State  Constable  an  active  man  in  his  office  ? 

A.     Very  efficient,  I  think. 

Q.     You  can  give  the  amount  of  sales  in  your  town  ? 

A.  I  only  know  from  the  returns  that  the  amount  of  sales  is  very  much 
less. 

Q.     Do  you  not  think  that  it  has  been  affected  by  the  number  of  seizures  ? 

A.  It  is  only  within  a  few  months  that  seizures  have  been  made.  For 
a  great  many  years  after  the  prohibitory  law  was  passed  it  was  practically  a 
dead  letter.  Now  and  then  a  temperance  man  would  be  alarmed  as  to  the  state 
of  things  and  commence  prosecutions.  They  would  commence  and  would 
prosecute  under  the  Nuisance  Act.  It  is  very  proper,  if  a  person  undertakes 
to  sell  liquor  against  the  law,  to  enforce  that  law ;  and  it  is  certainly  very 
desirable  to  stop  dram-selling  as  much  as  possible. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  theoretically  in.  abstaining  from  intoxicating  drinks  as 
a  beverage  ? 

A.  I  never  have  joined  a  total  abstinence  society.  I  do  not  think  it  is  a 
duty.  I  do  not  think  the  sin  is  in  the  use,  but  in  the  abuse  of  these  things. 

Q.    Does  not  the  moderate  use  of  liquor  tend  to  the  abuse  ? 


332  APPENDIX. 

A.  It  may,  sir  ;  but"  it  is  one  of  the  trials  that  we  have  to  stand  in  this 
probationary  state. 

Q.    But  do  we  not  want  to  get  rid  of  as  many  of  the  evils  as  possible  ? 

A.  I  advocate  a  license  law  because  I  want  to  get  rid  of  the  evil  of  intem- 
perance as  much  as  possible. 

Q.  You  see  a  very  strenuous  effort  made  now  to  get  a  license  law  since 
the  State  Constables  have  been  doing  their  work.  What  influence  behind 
that  has  led  to  this  effort,  in  your  opinion  ? 

A.  Well,  sir  ;  it  is  that  kind  of  restraint  which  is  laid  upon  the  community, 
a  large  portion  of  whom  use  these  prohibited  articles  in  some  shape  or  other ; 
that  kind  of  restraint  they  want  to  get  rid  of.  They  do  not  want,  if  a  man 
chooses  to  have  wine  in  his  house,  to  subject  a  man  to  fine  and  imprisonment 
who  sells  that  wine  to  him.  He  does  not  want  to  go  and  buy,  when  the  man 
of  whom  he  buys  has  no  right  to  sell.  It  is  a  burden  on  the  community  that 
they  want  to  throw  off,  I  think. 

Q.  Have  you  any  question  that  the  moving  cause  of  this  thing  is  from  the 
liquor-dealers  ? 

A.  They  probably  are  most  active  because  their  business  is  growing  less 
by  it. 

Q.     Why  do  they  move  at  all  ? 

A.  1  suppose  they  would  be  glad  to  be  enabled  to  sell  without  being 
constantly  under  the  feeling  that  they  were  violating  the  law. 

Q.  I  would  ask  whether,  in  your  opinion,  the  moving  cause  in  this  great 
effort  for  a  license  law,  is  not  from  the  liquor-dealers  in  order  to  save  their 
business  ? 

A.  Well,  sir;  in  answer  to  that  question  I  would  say  that  I  have  no 
knowledge  on  the  subject.  I  have  no  sympathy  of  action  with  liquor-dealers. 
I  have  not  to  my  knowledge  had  any  conversation  on  this  subject  with  men 
who  are  interested  much  in  the  sale  of  liquors.  I  should  think  it  probable 
that  they  were  the  prominent  party  in  the  movement,  because  I  have  heard 
that  they  had  a  sort  of  State  Alliance  or  State  Society.  I  have  read  from 
the  papers  that  there  is  an  association  existing  among  these  liquor-dealers ; 
but  a  very  large  class  of  the  persons  who  now  sell  liquors  I  should  have  no 
desire  to  have  licensed  if  a  license  law  were  granted. 

TESTIMONY  OF  FRANK  EDSON. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILIX)     Wliere  do  you  reside  ? 

A.    InHadley. 

Q.     What  is  your  business  ? 

A.     Broom  manufacturer. 

Q.     Have  you  any  connection  with  the  liquor  agency  ? 

A.     I  am  the  town  agent,  and  have  been  for  about  a  year  and  a  half. 

Q.  Will  you  state  the  general  workings  of  that  agency  in  your  town  ? 
Have  you  any  memorandum  or  data  that  you  can  give  ? 

A.  I  have  made  the  statement  repeatedly,  that  I  do  not  think  that  one- 
tenth  part  of  the  liquor  sold  in  our  town  is  sold  for  legitimate  purposes, 
and  those  to  whom  we  do  sell  desire  to  get  the  cheapest  kind ;  and  whenever 
we  have  endeavored  to  draw  the  thing  down  pretty  close,  there  invariably 


APPENDIX.  333 

spring  up  other  places.  People  even  come  in  with  wagons,  and  drive  around 
and  supply  customers.  Along  through  the  summer  we  cut  down  to  some 
extent,  and  about  Thanksgiving  we  found  that  there  were  a  good  many  sales, 
and  we  cut  off  one  class  of  people  entirely.  That  accounts  for  the  number 
of  sales  being  less ;  but  since  then  two  other  places  have  been  opened. 

Q.  What  was  the  proportion  of  liquors  which  you  have  sold,  which  you 
think  amounts  to  one-tenth  ? 

A.  I  have  drawn  up  a  statement  which  shows  the  different  kinds  of  liquors 
which  have  been  sold  by  the  agency.  [See  Report  of  State  Liquor  Agent.] 

Q.     How  i«  it  as  to  the  state  of  temperance  in  your  town  ? 

A,  I  do  not  think  that  the  state  of  temperance  is  in  near  as  good  condition 
as  it  was  fifteen  years  ago,  I  see  a  great  many  more  persons  drunk  now  than 
I  can  remember  of  having  seen  when  temperance  went  so  far  that  the  farmers 
cut  down  their  cider  apple  trees.  I  think  I  see  more  drunkenness  in  Hadley 
in  proportion  than  I  see  in  Boston  or  New  York. 

Q.     What  is  the  quality  of  the  liquors  furnished  by  the  State  Agency  ? 

A.     The  liquors  which  are  sent  to  us  are  said  to  be  pure  liquors. 

Q.    Is  it  so  ? 

A.  Our  people  do  not  think  so.  I  had  an  application  on  Monday  last  from 
persons  that  wanted  that  I  should  send  to  New  York  for  some  whiskey.  I 
have  whiskey  in  the  cellar  that  I  paid  four  dollars  for,  and  I  have  another 
brand  which  costs  six  dollars  and  a  half;  but  I  can  buy  better  liquor  in  Boston 
and  New'York  of  a  respectable  dealer  for  a  great  deal  less  money  ;  in  fact,  I 
know  I  can  buy  that  which  gives  better  satisfaction. 

Q.  Is  that  the  general  impression  in  regard  to  the  quality  of  the  liquors 
from  the  town  agency  ? 

A.  It  is  universally  considered  that  anything  that  comes  from  the  agency 
is  not  fit  to  use,  I  believe.  Whether  it  is  said  from  prejudice  or  from  actual 
judgment,  of  course  I  do  not  know. 

Q.     Do  you  sell  any  wine  ? 

A.     Very  little  wine. 

Q.     Do  you  know  where  it  is  furnished  for  the  communion  table  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  do  not. 

Q.     It  is  not  furnished  by  you  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  it  is  not.  I  do  not  know  but  the  farmers  themselves  make  it 
in  some  cases.  There  have  been  cases,  also,  where  liquor  has  been  sent  by 
express  and  consigned  to  me. 

Q.     To  your  knowledge  ? 

A.     Not  until  after  it  was  done. 

Q.     Did  the  parties  who  got  it  ? 

A.     Sometimes  they  did,  and  sometimes  they  did  not.  * 

Q.  The  mode  of  getting  the  liquor  by  sending  it  to  you,  how  extensive  is 
it? 

A.     It  is  not  very  extensive  in  my  case  ;  no  very  great  amount. 

Q.  How  is  it  in  regard  to  the  number  of  secret  places  for  sale  of  liquor  in 
your  town  V 

A.  There  are  no  secret  places  in  Hadley  that  would  be  called  respectable 
places. 


B34  APPENDIX. 

Q.     Are  there  any  which  are  not  respectable  ? 

A.  I  have  reason  to  believe  that  there  are  three  within  half  a  mile  of  me. 
I  know  that  there  is  plenty  of  it  somewhere.  I  have  men  about  me  who 
occasionally  have  been  in  the  habit  of  having  a  spree ;  I  do  not  see  but  that 
they  have  their  sprees  as  often  as  they  ever  did ;  and  I  do  not  find  a  man  that 
is  respectable  that  sells  them  a  drop  ;  but  they  get  it  somewhere. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  about  the  habits  of  people  in  reference  to  the 
use  of  liquor  for  convivial  purposes  ? 

A.  I  believe  there  is  more  liquor  drank  among  respectable  families  in 
Hadley  than  there  was  fifteen  years  ago. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  speak  of  an  increase  of  drunkenness  gener- 
ally. Is  that  the  case  with  the  farmers  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  not  generally. 

Q.     Has  there  been  any  deterioration  among  them  ? 

A.     No,  sir,  I  do  not  know  that  there  has. 

Q.    What  class  do  you  refer  to  ? 

A.     There  is  a  large  class  of  Irish  people  who  use  liquors. 

Q.     Have  you  any  confidence  in  moral  suasion  on  that  class? 

A.    I  think  I  have  as  much  as  upon  any  other. 

Q.  But  they  are  the  class  of  people  that  have  the  sprees  which  you  speak 
of,  are  they  not  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  there  is  not  a  great  many  of  them  ;  but  they  have  their  sprees 
as  much  as  they  ever  did,  as  far  as  I  can  see. 

Q.     The  drunkenness  is  among  this  class,  is  it  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  but  what  I  mean  to  say  is  that  the  better  families  make  more 
use  of  it  than  they  did  formerly. 

Q.  Do  you  always  ask  the  question  whether  those  who  purchase  of  you  are 
going  to  use  it  for  medicinal  purposes  ? 

A.    I  do  unless  I  am  positive  that  the  people  are  all  right. 

Q.     Have  you  reason  to  think  that  the  people  claim  it  falsely  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  do  not  think  that  I  have  reason  to  think  so. 

Q.     You  do  not  think  the  quantity  you  sell  is  large  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  the  quantity  is  less  than  at  anytime  since  the  agency  has  been 
established. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that,  when  liquor  is  carried  about  in  carts  and  by 
expressmen,  a  license  law  is  likely  to  make  the  consumption  of  it  greater  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  as  it  will  make  it  any  greater.  I  think  that  where 
there  is  such  a  trade  as  that,  people  will  get  a  jug  full  and  take  it  into  their 
houses,  and  drink  more  than  they  would  if  they  were  to  go  into  a  place  where 
it  was  sold  and  get  a  drink  and  go  along. 

Q.  What  is  your  observation  on  that  point  ?  Can  you  affirm  that  as  a 
matter  of  fact  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  can  affirm  it  as  a  fact  any  more  than  that.  There 
is  another  evil  springing  up  in  our  vicinity,  and  that  is  the  establishing  of 
club-rooms. 

Q.     Are  there  any  in  your  town  ? 

A .     I  do  not  know  that  there  are  in  our  own  town. 


APPENDIX.  335 

Q.  Was  your  remark  that  not  one-tenth  part  of  the  liquor  sold  in  your 
town  -was  sold  by  yourself  ? 

A.  I  said  that  it  was  not  my  opinion  that  one-tenth  of  it  was  used  as  the 
law  intended  that  it  should  be. 

Q.    You  do  not  mean  to  sell  otherwise  than  for  medicines  ? 

A.     Certainly  not. 

Q.  When  liquors  are  consigned  to  you  which  come  by  express,  do  you 
seize  them  and  hold  them  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  ever  claim  them  ? 

A.  I  have  told  the  persons  that  I  did  not  like  it ;  that  it  was  not  the  square 
way  of  doing  business. 

Q«     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     What  do  you  mean  by  those  club-rooms  ? 

A.    I  mean  that  there  are  several  in  Northampton  that  I  know  of. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Are  you  a  member  of  one? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Are  you  a  total  abstainer  ? 

•A*    No,  sir. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Do  they  have  liquor  in  those  club-rooms  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OP  MAYOR  J.  H.  PERRY. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)    What  position  do  you  hold  in  New  Bedford  ? 

A.    Mayor  of  the  city. 

Q.  Will  you  state  the  general  workings  of  the  prohibitory  law  in  New- 
Bedford? 

A.  I  think  it  has  not  answered  what  it  was  supposed  it  would  do  by  its 
friends.  I  cannot  tell  you  how  much  worse  it  would  have  been  if  it  had  not 
been  enforced.  I  am  satisfied  that  things  are  bad  enough  as  they  are. 

Q.  How  is  it  as  to  intemperance,  compared  with  what  it  was  several  years 
ago? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  it  has  diminished  any;  I  cannot  say  that  it  is  on 
the  increase. 

Q.    Does  it  prevail  among  certain  classes  ? 

A.    It  does. 

Q.  How  is  it  as  to  the  ability  of  the  authorities  to  enforce  the  law,  so  that 
people  may  not  get  the  means  of  intoxication  ? 

A.  So  far  as  the  city  authorities  are  concerned,  it  was  found  impracticable 
a  few  years  since,  as  evidence  could  not  be  found  to  convict.  For  that  reason, 
it  has  been  left  to  the  State  officers. 

Q.  How  is  it  as  to  the  effect  of  the  efforts  of  the  State  officers,  as  to 
checking.intemperance  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  it  has  checked  it. 

Q.  How  is  it  as  to  the  places,  secret  or  open,  where  it  is  sold ;  have  they 
been  checked  ? 

A.  I  suppose  there  are  a  great  many  places  where  it  is  sold,  but  that  is  not 
a  matter  under  my  charge.  The  Chief  of  Police  of  our  city  is  here,  and  can 
answer  on  that  point  better  than  I  can. 


336  APPENDIX. 

Q.  What  are  your  views  as  to  the  comparative  benefits  of  the  present  pro- 
hibitory law  as  compared  with  a  law  which  should  regulate  the  sale  under 
restrictions  ;  that  is,  which  should  allow  persons  to  sell  under  the  control  of 
the  mayor  and  aldermen  of  cities,  with  power  of  revocation  ?  Which  system 
do  you  think  would  tend  to  check  intemperance  most  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell  what  the  practical  results  would  be.  So  far  as  the  result 
now  is  we  have  no  effect  at  all.  I  think  if  some  other  law  were  tried,  then 
the  authorities  might  have  some  charge  over  the  inhabitants. 

Q.  What  is  the  sentiment  of  the  people  of  New  Bedford,  men  of  respecta- 
bility and  character  and  influence,  and  the  men  who  exert  influence  in  other 
matters  ? 

A.  I  must  speak  without  statistics.  I  think  the  majority  would  sustain  a 
change  in  the  law.  I  am  not  prepared  to  say  what. 

Q.  Is  there  an  influence  that  would  enable  any  authority  to  enforce  the 
law,  so  as  to  check  the  sale  of  liquors  ?  Is  there  a  public  sentiment  against 
the  law? 

A.     I  think  it  is  against  it,  because  it  has  been  tried  and  not  sustained. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  anything  of  the  effect  of  closing  up  places  of  sale,  under 
the  Nuisance  Act ;  whether  it  closes  all  the  places  of  sale  or  whether  it  checks 
intemperance  ? 

A.  I  judge  from  what  I  see  in  our  police  courts.  I  do  not  think  it  has 
been  checked. 

TESTIMONY  OF  OLIVER  M.  BROWNELL. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside,  sir  ? 

A.    New  Bedford. 

Q.    What  positio^n  do  you  hold  there  at  the  present  time  ? 

A.     City  Marshal. 

Q.  How  is  it  as  to  the  general  effect,  so  far  as  comes  under  your  observa- 
tion, of  the  working  of  the  present  prohibitory  law,  in  checking  intemperance 
and  the  sale  of  liquor  in  improper  places  ? 

A.  It  has  closed  up  the  places  of  public  sale.  There  are  no  places  there 
where  liquor  is  sold  in  public. 

Q.    How  is  the  effect  upon  intemperance  or  drunkenness  ? 

A.     I  think  that  is  just  about  the  same. 

Q.     You  have  as  many  cases  now  as  before  they  were  closed  ? 

A.  No,  we  do  not  have  quite  so  many,  and  we  do  not  have  so  many  crimes 
of  other  kinds  ;  it  is  about  in  proportion  to  the  other  crimes. 

Q.  I  would  inquire  of  you,  sir,  if  there  are  places  where  it  is  sold  notwith- 
standing the  public  sale  is  closed  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir  ;  a  great  many  places  where  it  is  sold  privately. 

Q.    What  is  the  character  of  those  places  ? 

A.     It  is  from  high  to  low ;  from  hotels  down  to  private  families. 

Q.  Do  the  hotels  which  have  ostensibly  stopped  the  sale  continue  to  sell, 
do  you  think  ? 

A.     I  have  no  doubt  of  it. 

Q.     How  is  it  as  to  the  eating-houses  ? 

A.     They  sell. 


APPENDIX.  337 

Q.  Is  the  sale  ab.out  the  same  as  ever  it  was  ?  Can  anybody  that  is  known 
by  them  to  be  of  the  right  stamp  get  liquor  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    What  is  their  scale  ? 

A.  They  know  the  men  they  are  selling  to.  They  do  not  sell  to  strangers 
unless  by  introduction  of  some  one  that  knows  of  them. 

Q.     Can  intemperate  persons  get  it  there  ? 

A.  I  presume  they  can  ;  though  a  person  that  is  likely  to  be  taken  up  for 
drunkenness,  cannot  get  it  easily. 

Q.  How  is  it  as  to  this  matter  of  disclosure  ?  Will  these  persons  disclose 
where  they  get  their  liquor  ? 

A.     Some  of  them  do. 

Q.     The  greater  proportion  ? 

A.  It  is  very  seldom  that  they  will  disclose  at  all.  I  believe  there  has 
been  one  this  season,  since  the  first  of  January ;  but  it  is  very  seldom  that 
they  get  one  to  disclose. 

Q.  If  those  persons  are  well  understood  as  to  character,  is  there  any 
difficulty  in  getting  from  these  places  where  it  is  understood  that  they  are 
closed  up  ? 

A.    None  at  all. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  say  there  is  no  open  sale  in  New  Bedford  ? 

A.     No  public  bar-room,  I  mean  by  that. 

Q.     Has  there  been  a  time  within  a  few  years  when  there  was  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     When  there  was  an  opportunity  for  anybody  to  buy  it  ? 

A.     Unless  he  was  a  man  that  was  likely  to  get  drunk. 

Q.     Do  you  sell  it  to  all  such  now  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    I  thought  you  said  they  would  not  sell  to  those  whom  they  did  not  know  ? 

A.     They  would  not  sell  to  those  they  did  not  know. 

Q.     Two  or  three  years  ago  they  would  not  sell  to  those  they  did  not  know  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Is  that  an  improvement  ? 

A.    I  have  not  said  whether  it  was  or  not.     I  presume  it  is. 

Q.     Can  the  State  Constables  get  at  it  ? 

A.     They  would  be  likely  to  seize  a  small  quantity. 

Q.     Could  you  not  get  evidence  if  you  set  about  it  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  It  is  more  difficult  to  get  evidence  in  a  liquor  case,  than  in 
anything  I  have  anything  to  do  with. 

Q.    How  long  a  time  have  the  State  Constables  been  in  operation  ? 

A.     There  is  generally  some  one  there  all  the  time. 

Q.  How  early  did  they  make  prosecutions  in  New  Bedford  ?  When  was 
the  first  prosecution  by  the  State  Constabulary  made  there  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  exactly.  I  recollect  going  round  to  notify  these  places. 
I  could  not  say  how  long  it  was  before  they  prosecuted.  Once  in  a  week  or 
two  there  would  be  two  or  three  there. 

Q.     Have  they  made  any  seizures  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  some  small  seizures. 
43 


338  APPENDIX. 

Q.  How  many  ? 

A.  I  think  they  have  made  three  or  four  there  of  small  quantities. 

Q.  Are  you  in  favor  of  a  license  law  ? 

A.  lam. 

Q.  What  sort  of  a  license  law  would  you  have  ? 

A.  I  would  have  a  law  that  every  city  and  town  should  license,  if  they 
saw  fit,  the  hotels  and  eating-houses. 

Q.  How  many  places  would  you'license  in  New  Bedford  ? 

A.  I  would  license  the  hotels  and  eating-houses* 

Q.  How  many  would  that  be  ? 

A .  Probably  twenty-five. 

Q.  Would  you  not  license  any  grocers  to  sell  to  families  ? 

A .  I  should  if  they  wanted  a  license. 

Q.  Do  not  about  all  the  grocers  sell,  more  or  less  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  How  many  grocers  do  you  think  sell  in  New  Bedford  ? 

A.  Four  or  five,  probably. 

Q.  No  more  than  four  or  five  in  New  Bedford  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  What  is  your  population  there  ? 

A.  Twenty  thousand,  probably. 

Q.  A  very  temperate  community,  is  it  not  ? 

A.  I  consider  it  so. 

Q.  Is  the  intemperance  not  confined  to  a  few  foreigners  ? 

A.  Well,  it  is  mostly  among  the  foreign  population. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EX-MAYOR  EDWARD  P.  BUFFINGTON. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)    You  reside  in  Fall  River,  do  you  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.    - 

Q.  Have  you  held  any  official  position  that  has  brought  you  in  contact 
with  the  operation  of  the  present  liquor  law  ? 

A.  I  have,  sir. 

Q.  What  is  it? 

A.  Mayor  of  the  city. 

Q.  What  years  ? 

A.  The  last  seven  preceding  this. 

Q.  Are  you  Mayor  at  the  present  time  ? 

A.  No,  sir. 

Q.  You  were  last  year  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  give  the  Committee  your  observation  in  regard  to  the  work- 
ings of  this  prohibitory  liquor  law,  in  checking  intemperance  and  the  improper 
sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.  My  observation  is  that  the  law  has  not  worked  to  reform  the  inebriate 

to  the  extent  that  the  friends  of  the  law,  in  my  opinion,  expected. 

Q.  What  has  been  the  effect  in  checking  the  cases  of  intemperance  or 
drunkenness  ? 


APPENDIX.  339 

A.  I  cannot  say  that  it  has  had  any  effect.  I  can  merely  state  the  ten- 
dency so  far  as  the  cause  of  temperance  is  concerned  for  the  last  three  years. 
I  would  say  that  the  arrests  last  year  were  378  against  144  the  year  before. 
What  the  causes  were,  you  must  judge  for  yourselves. 

Q.     Do  you  infer  that  the  cases  of  intemperance  were  greater  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  any  more  stringent  measures  were  taken  to  arrest 
persons,  and  I  do  not  know  there  have  been.  We  have  supposed  that  we  had 
a  very  efficient  City  Marshal. 

Q.     How  is  it  as  to  the  number  of  places  where  liquors  are  procured  ? 

A.  I  should  think  there  were  probably  two  or  three  hundred  places  where 
liquor  is  got  in  some  way  or  another. 

Q.     That  has  been  diminished  in  the  last  year  ? 

A.  I  am  not  prepared  to  judge.  I  can  only  state  that  most  of  the  public 
places  of  the  better  class  that  did  sell,  have  been  forced,  some  of  them,  to  close, 
and  in  the  month  when  the  largest  amount  of  seizures  was  made  the  arrests 
for  drunkenness  were  the  largest  of  any  in  tha  year. 

Q.  I  would  inquire  your  opinion  as  to  the  practicability,  as  things  are,  of 
enforcing  in  Fall  River,  the  present  prohibitory  law,  so  as  to  check  materially 
intemperance  and  the  illegal  sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  would  say  in  reply  to  that,  that  I  have  no  doubt  that  the 
State  Constables  may  shut  up  now  and  then  a  place ;  but  we  have  a  class  of 
people  there  who  will  have  it.  What  the  effect  is  you  can  judge  as  well  as 
I  can. 

Q.  Have  you  any  opinions  formed  from  your  observation,  as  to  whether 
any  other  system  would  aid  the  police  authorities  in  checking  this  evil  better 
than  the  present  ? 

A.    I  have  not,  sir ;  I  have  not  given  the  matter  any  attention. 

Q,  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Did  you  make  vigorous  efforts  during  the  seven 
years  in  which  you  were  Mayor,  to  suppress  the  traffic  ? 

A.  I  certainly  did.  The  City  Marshal  and  assistants  had  that  under  their 
charge  as  much  as  any  other  law. 

Q.     Did  yo^  direct  your  officers  to  break  down  the  traffic  ?' 

A.  I  would  say  that  if  I  had  been  appointed  an  officer  to  prosecute  the 
violations  of  the  liquor  law,  I  should  have  attended  to  it.  I  was  appointed  to 
executive  duty.  So  far  as  the  prosecutions  were  concerned  it  was  the  duty 
of  the  City  Marshal.  If  he  did  not  do  his  duty,  it  was  only  for  me  to  examine 
whether  or  not  he  had  accomplished  what  was  for  him  to  do. 

Q.     Did  you  intend  to  hold  him  to  a  strict  accountability  on  this  subject  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  I  did  more  than  on  any  other. 

Q.    Was  it  your  desire  to  make  the  law  efficient  ? 

A.     As  much  as  any  other  law,  so  far  as  I  know. 

Q.  Have  the  moral  efforts  in  behalf  of  temperance  in  Fall  River  been 
continued  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  but  they  have. 

Q.    Are  you  a  total  abstainer  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  population  of  your  city  are  any  better  now  in  this 
respect  than  they  were  formerly  ? 


340  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  think  the  condition  is  far  better  than  it  was  when  I  was  a  boy,  in 
proportion  to  the  number.  A  large  proportion  of  our  people  are  of  other 
nationalities,  where  they  have  been  in  the  habit  of  using  liquor. 

TESTIMONY  OF  CHARLES  G.  DAVIS. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.     In  Plymouth. 

Q.     What  position  do  you  hold  there  ? 

A.  I  am  United  States  Assessor  for  the  First  Congressi6nal  District, 
including  Fall  River,  New  Bedford,  Barnstable  County,  Martha's  Vineyard, 
Nantucket,  about  half  of  Bristol  County,  and  about  half  of  Plymouth  County. 

Q.  Was  the  number  of  licenses  granted  in  your  district  the  past  year  less 
than  the  year  before  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  I  think  it  was.  I  have  given  the  figures  to  Mr.  Clapp  of  this 
city,  and  no  memorandum  was  kept  of  them. 

Q.     Is  there  any  reason  why  it  has  fallen  off  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  two  reasons,  I  think,  are  apparent.  The  first  is  that  I  find  in 
my  experience,  that  liquor-dealers  had  no  objections  to  applying  for  what  was 
then  called  a  license,  under  the  idea  which  was  very  prevalent  at  that  time 
among  them,  that  it  might  be  a  protection  to  them  ;  but  at  the  time  that  the 
question,  a  year  ago,  was  before  the  Supreme  Court  at  Washington,  they 
declined  to  apply  for  licenses  any  more.  That  was  the  principal  reason  why 
they  did  not  apply  for  licenses ;  and  the  efforts  of  the  State  Constabulary  have 
added  to  the  force  of  that  reason.  They  do  not  wish  the  application  for  a 
license  to  be  used  against  them,  as  was  attempted  to  be  done  about  that  time 
before  Judge  Allen  in  one  of  the  courts  of  this  city. 

Q.  Have  you  made  any  observations  upon  the  effects  of  the  present  system 
of  legislation  upon  the  usages  of  society  ? 

A.  More  as  a  man,  perhaps,  than  as  an  officer.  As  a  lawyer,  having 
observation  in  the  court,  as  a  citizen,  more  especially  in  Plymouth,  and  as 
having  occasion  to  be  in  New  Bedford  often,  I  have  very  decided  opinions  on 
the  question.  N 

Q.     Will  you  please  to  state  your  opinion  ? 

A.  I  have  no  question  in  my  own  mind  that  the  law  does  much  more  hurt 
than  good.  I  think  it  is  gradually  poisoning  those  people  who  drink  at  all,  by 
a  poorer  kind  of  liquor  than  would  otherwise  be  had.  Like  rancid  butter, 
spread  out  finer  on  the  bread,  it  spoils  more  good  bread.  As  we  destroy  the 
respectable  dealers,  many  more  of  a  poorer  class,  selling  a  much  poorer  liquor, 
spring  up.  That,  I  should  say,  was  my  opinion  under  oath.  Without  any 
question,  I  think  that  is  so.  In  the  country,  I  think,  the  more  respectable  class 
of  dealers  are  destroyed,  while  in  the  city  it  seems  to  me  to  be  the  other  way, 
and  also,  to  a  great  extent,  in  the  larger  .cities. 

Q.  Would  some  law  permitting  the  towns,  if  they  saw  fit,  to  grant  the 
permission  of  sale  under  such  restrictions  as  might  be  adopted,  operate  better, 
in  your  judgment,  in  regard  to  suppressing  the  evils  growing  out  of  the  sale 
of  intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.  I  have  no  opinion  upon  the  subject  of  a  license  law,  because  it  would 
depend  so  entirely  upon  the  character  of  the  law.  I  do  not  think  any  law 


APPENDIX.  341 

would  operate  so  badly  as  the  present  law.  I  often  find  very  young  men  that 
I  know  in  my  own  town,  mechanics  and  farmer's  sons  who  are  in  the  habit  of 
using  liquors,  and  from  this  and  from  what  I  know  otherwise,  I  know  that 
moderate  drinking  has  increased,  more  especially  within  the  last  twelve  or 
fifteen  years.  What  it  is  among  the  Irish  and  the  lower  classes,  I  suppose  is 
as  well  known  to  the  Committee  as  to  myself,  some  of  them  being  lawyers  and 
equally  conversant  with  the  world. 

Q.  As  to  the  social  usages,  how  do  they  compare  with  those  of  fifteen  or 
twenty  years  ago,  among  the  most  respectable  portion  of  the  people  ? 

A.  1  think  that  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquor  is  dishonorable  in  Bristol 
and  Plymouth  Counties.  I  suppose,  however,  that  a  very  large  mass  of  the 
men  who  are  deemed  temperance  men  are  not  so  from  principle,  and  are  not 
really  total  abstainers.  I  suppose  that,  as  men  of  the  world,  we  might  say 
that  sea  captains  are  almost  universally  addicted  to  the  use  of  liquors,  yet  I 
never  heard  of  a  drunkard  among  them. 

Q.     Where  do  they  get  it  ? 

A.  Anywhere.  And  it  seems  to  me  that  if  a  man  has  a  right  to  drink 
liquor,  it  will  follow  that  it  will  be  sold. 

It  was  suggested  by  Mr.  Miner,  that  Bishop  Baker,  of  New  Hampshire,  was 
present,  and  that  at  another  time  it  might  not  be  convenient  to  take  his 
testimony  ;  and,  by  general  consent  of  counsel  and  Committee,  Bishop  Baker 
was  called  in  behalf  of  the  remonstrants. 

TESTIMONY  OF  BISHOP  BAKER. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Your  residence  is  Concord,  N.  H.  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  many  years  have  you  occupied  your  present  office  ? 

A.     Fifteen  years. 

Q.  Will  you  state  through  what  portions  of  the  country  you  have  been 
accustomed  to  travel  ? 

A.  Through  the  Northern  States  and  part  of  the  Southern,  embracing 
California  and  Oregon. 

Q.    How  many  times  have  you  visited  Oregon  ? 

A.     Twice. 

Q.     And  also  California  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  state  briefly  your  own  view  of  the  doctrines  of  temperance 
and  those  held  by  your  ministry  ? 

A .     Probably  it  is  in  substance  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.     Entirely  so  ? 

A .     So  far  as  I  know. 

Q.    Is  your  discipline  generally  in  favor  of  that  principle  ? 

A.  It  is.  Gentlemen  who  sell  except  in  cases  of  extreme  necessity  are 
brought  to  trial. 

Q.     And  this  is  true  of  the  church,  whether  in  New  England  or  elsewhere  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Are  the  opinions  of  your  ministry  quite  uniform  ? 


342  APPENDIX. 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  is  your  view,  from  the  aspects  which  you  observe  in  travelling, 
as  to  the  condition  of  the  temperance  cause  generally  ? 

A .     That  it  is  good. 

Q.  Do  you  perceive  whether  it  is  worse  in  New  England  than  in  States 
where  it  is  not  attempted  to  prohibit  the  sale  ? 

A.     I  could  not  answer  that  definitely. 

Q.  So  far  as  hotel  accommodatipns  are  concerned,  what  is  your  opinion 
as  to  their  being  authorized  to  sell  ?  Are  these  grounds  upon  which  you 
would  prefer  such  an  arrangement  that  the  hotels  might  sell  to  travellers  ? 

A.    No,  sir.     I  do  not  know  that  there  are. 

Q.     Have  you  felt  otherwise  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Adjourned. 


APPENDIX.  343 

ELEVENTH    DAY. 

FRIDAY,  March  8, 1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  and  resumed  the  hearing  of  testimony  in 
behalf  of  the  petitioners. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  ANDREW  P.  PEABODY,  D.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     You  are  now  a  Professor  in  Harvard  College  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  Professor  of  Christian  Morals. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  in  the  Christian  ministry  ? 

A.  Thirty-four  years.  I  was  formerly  the  pastor  of  a  church  in 
Portsmouth. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  had  occasion  to  consider,  and  have  you  considered,  the 
relation  which  prohibitory  legislation,  like  that  of  our  liquor  law,  bears  to 
practical  morality  in  the  community,  and  if  so,  will  you  be  kind  enough  to 
state  your  observations  and  conclusions  ? 

A.  I  was  at  one  time  very  strongly  in  favor  of  prohibitory  legislation,  but 
I  believe  that  it  has  done  little  or  no  permanent  good,  and  has  produced  a 
great  deal  of  evil.  It  has  led  to  a  vast  amount  of  fraud  and  perjury ;  has 
probably  led  to  the  adulteration  of  liquors  used,  and  has  thus  rendered  them 
more  deleterious  in  their  consequences.  As  to  the  operation  of  the  present 
legislation  in  Massachusetts,  my  observation  has  been  confined  to  Cambridge 
alone,  but  I  feel  quite  sure  that  in  Cambridge  no  effect  has  been  produced 
upon  the  sale  of  ardent  spirits  by  that  legislation.. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  it  has  produced  any,  and  if  so,  what  effect,  upon  the 
consumption  of  spirituous  liquors  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.     It  has  produced  no  assignable  effect. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  How  long  have  you  been  a  Professor  in  Harvard 
College? 

A.    Between  six  and  seven  years. 

Q.    Was  there  a  prohibitory  law  in  New  Hampshire  when  you  lived  there  ? 

A.  There  was  a  prohibitory  law  in  operation  during  several  years  of  my 
residence  there.  I  know  that  the  law  did  not,  in  the  city  in  which  I  resided, 
reduce  the  sale  or  the  consumption  of  ardent  spirits  in  any  degree  whatever. 
I  am  very  certain  that  no  one  was  deterred  from  selling,  nor  any  one  from 
purchasing  ardent  spirits,  by  the  existence  of  the  law. 

Q.     Was  the  law  enforced  at  all  in  Portsmouth  ? 

A.  Several  attempts  were  made  to  enforce  it — very  partial,  very  brief,  and 
with  no  enduring  influence.  A  few  persons  were  occasionally  fined,  but 
returned  immediately  to  their  business,  and  I  knew  not  a  single  case  of  a 
person  being  molested  a  second  time  for  selling.  I  became  convinced  of  the 
worthlessness  of  the  law,  and  its  operation  entirely  defeated  my  hopes  and 
expectations  in  regard  to  it  in  the  city  in  which  I  lived. 

Q.    Was  there  much  intemperance  in  Portsmouth  ? 


344  APPENDIX. 

A.  As  much,  probably,  as  in  any  place  of  the  same  size ;  I  think  that  it 
was  neither  better  nor  worse. 

Q.  Have  you  any  accurate  idea  of  how  many  persons  in  Portsmouth  sold 
liquor  ? 

A.  I  attempted,  at  several  different  times,  to  make  an  estimate,  and  the 
number  varied  a  very  little  from  one  hundred  and  fifty. 

Q.     What  were  the  laws  in  New  Hampshire  previous  to  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  think  that  there  was  a  license  law,  but  one  so  executed  as  to  afford 
no  barrier  whatever  against  the  sale  of  liquor.  Any  one  who  applied,  received 
a  license,  and  the  fee  was  hardly  more  than  sufficient  to  pay  for  its 
registration. 

Q.     Then  the  license  law  was  entirely  ineffectual  ? 

A.     Entirely  so. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  license  law  in  any  State  that  ever  did  succeed  in 
restricting  the  traffic  ? 

A.  I  have  never  observed  the  workings  of  a  license  law  in  any  State  but 
this  and  New  Hampshire. 

Q.  What  would  you  do  in  this  State,  where  it  is  claimed  that  both  kinds 
of  law  have  failed,  to  effect  their  object  ? 

A.  That  is  a  very  difficult  question  to  answer.  I  should  be  very  solicitous 
that  the  law  should  be  declarative  of  the  public  sense  as  to  the  use  and  abuse 
of  intoxicating  liquors.  I  think  that  the  laws  help  to  educate  each  successive 
generation  of  the  community,  and  that,  against  which  there  is  no  legal  reproach 
or  legal  stigma,  is  very  apt  to  be  regarded  as  entirely  innocent  and  harmless. 
But  I  should  expect  very  little  from  legislation.  I  believe  that  the  moral 
action  of  men  upon  their  fellow-men  by  example,  by  influence,  by  personal 
effort,  and  especially  the  influence  of  parents  and  teachers,  in  forming  the 
habits  of  the  young,  are  the  chief  reliances  in  the  establishment  of  temperate 
habits  in  the  community.  I  have  very  little  faith  in  any  other  method. 

Q.     What  is  your  idea  of  the  use  of  intoxicating  drinks  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt,  that,  except  for  medicinal  purposes,  distilled  spirits 
are  useless,  and  worse  than  useless.  I  should  be  very  glad  to  have  them 
banished  entirely  from  the  community.  I  have  the  same  opinion  in  regard  to 
what  is  ordinarily  called  wine,  and  sold  as  wine  in  America.  I  think  other- 
wise in  regard  to  the  light  and  pure  wines  of  Europe ;  and  could  they  be 
introduced,  and  brought  into  use  here,  I  should  regard  such  introduction  and 
use  as  eminently  favorable  to  the  temperance  cause.  They  would  supply  a 
means  of  refreshment,  and  a  drink  that  would  be  stimulating  without  being 
intoxicating. 

Q.  Then  you  regard  the  use,  as  a  beverage,  of  distilled  spirits,  and  the 
use  of  the  article  ordinarily  sold  in  this  country  as  wine,  as  injurious  ? 

A.     I  do. 

Q.     And  it  is  very  desirable  to  get  rid  of  them  if  we  can  ? 

A.     I  think  so. 

Q.     But  that  both  species  of  law  have  failed  thus  far  to  effect  that  object  ? 

A.    I  believe  so. 

Q.     Still  you  would  have  some  law  upon  the  subject  ? 

A.    I  would. 


APPENDIX.  345 

Q.    But  you  would  have  a  law  declaratory  of  the  sense  of  the  community  ? 

A.    I  would.  \ 

Q.     Because  law  is  an  educator  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  So  that  between  a  license  law,  giving  a  legal  sanction  to  the  sale  of 
liquor,  on  the  ground  that  the  public  good  requires  it,  and  a  prohibitory  law, 
although  it  is  not  enforced,  you  would  prefer  the  latter  inasmuch  as  it  tells  the 
truth  ?  Is  not  that  your  position  ? 

A.  It  would  be  my  position  if  I  admitted  your  statement  to  be  a  statement 
of  the  whole  ground  ;  but  I  believe  that  all  the  prohibitory  laws  that  have  been 
enacted  have,  as  I  said  in  the  early  part  of  my  examination,  done  a  great  deal 
of  mischief  by  the  opportunities  and  invitations  they  offer  for  perjury  on  a 
large  and  most  harmful  scale,  and  for  that  reason  I  feel  afraid  of  such  laws. 

Q.     Would  you  be  without  any  law  ? 

A.  No  ;  the  legislation  which  I  should  most  prefer,  and  which  I  should 
regard  as  equitable,  would  be  that  which  should  impose  upon  vendors  of 
intoxicating  liquor  the  entire  cost  of  the  pauperism  and  crime  that  could  be 
traced  to  the  use  of  such  means. 

Q.     Do  you  conceive  such  legislation  practicable  ? 

A.     I  believe  it  to  be. 

Q.  You  say  the  "  entire  cost  of  the  pauperism  and  crime  ;"  is  there  not 
in  addition  a  great  charge  upon  the  public  wealth  ? 

A.  There  certainly  is ;  and  I  care  not  how  heavy  the  charge,  or  how 
heavy  a  bill  is  brought  against  the  vendors  of  intoxicating  liquors  for  the 
mischief  they  may  do. 

Q.     Do  you  conceive  that  practicable  ? 

A.    I  believe  it  to  be. 

Q.  How  many  millions  of  dollars  do  you  suppose  would  be  required  to  pay 
all  these  charges  ? 

A .     It  would  be  an  immense  sum. 

Q.    Would  it  not  be  more  than  all  the  liquor-dealers  are  worth  ? 

A.    In  that  case,  you  might  crush  the  business  completely. 

Q.     Do  you  believe  that  system  is  practicable  ? 

A.     I  believe  that  it  is. 

Q.     Then  you  would  have  neither  a  prohibitory  law  nor  a  license  law  ? 

A.    No,  I  would  not. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  JOHN  JONES. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  is  your  residence  ? 

A.     Bellingham. 

Q.     What  is  your  occupation  ? 

A.     Up  to  the  present  year  my  occupation  has  been  that  of  a  clergyman. 

Q.     Of  what  denomination  ? 

A.  Methodist.  My  present  business  is  farming,  and  attending  to  some 
official  duties  in  my  own  town. 

Q.     Where  have  you  resided  ? 

A.  My  native  place  was  in  Maine.  I  resided  there  until  I  was  thirteen 
years  old. 

44 


346  APPENDIX. 

Q.     Were  you  in  Maine  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  the  Maine  Law  ? 

A.     I  was. 

Q.  State,  very  briefly,  how  you  felt  in  regard  to  that  measure,  and  what 
you  did  ? 

A.  I  felt  very  friendly  to  the  measure,  as  a  matter  of  course,  flattering 
myself  that  it  might  do  a  great  work  in  the  suppression  of  the  evils  of  intem- 
perance and  in  the  promotion  of  the  cause  of  temperance.  I  have  yielded 
those  convictions  with  as  great  a  -degree  of  reluctance  as  I  ever  did  any 
convictions  upon  any  subject,  in  my  life. 

Q.     What  is  your  present  opinion  V 

A.  1  have  been  greatly  disappointed.  The  law  has  failed  to  do  what  I 
hoped  it  might  do.  At  the  time  of  the  passage  of  that  law,  I  was  actively 
engaged  in  the  cause  of  temperance,  and  had  under  my  supervision  five 
divisions  of  the  Sons  of  Temperance,  in  Oxford  County ;  and  I  found  in  these 
divisions,  as  well  as  in  the  community  at  large,  a  disposition,  to  a  considerable 
extent,  to  rebel  against  the  law.  I  took  the  law,  and  carried  it  into  the 
divisions,  and  tried  to  persuade  them,  as  far  as  possible,  to  accept  it  as  the  law 
of  the  people,  and  especially  as  the  friends  of  temperance,  to  give  it  a  fair 
trial ;  to  take  it  into  their  hands  as  their  instrument,  and  to  use  it  prudently 
and  wisely  for  the  suppression  of  the  liquor  traflic. 

A.  What  has  been  your  observation  of  the  workings  of  the  prohibitory  law 
in  Massachusetts  ? 

A .  So  far  as  my  observation  extends,  either  because  of  the  operation  of 
the  law  or  for  some  other  reason,  (and  I  confess  that  I  do  not  know  what  else 
to  attribute  it  to,)  the  traflic  has  retired  from  public  view  and  gone  behind 
the  curtain,  and  into  obscure  places.  My  opinion  is,  that  the  older  class  of 
men — in  that  portion  of  the  State  with  which  I  am  best  acquainted,  and  in 
the  entire  western  part  of  the  State — drink  very  little  liquor,  but  I  observe 
that  our  young  men  are  in  the  habit  of  dodging  into  these  dark  saloons, 
where  they  contract  habits  of  drinking  and  gaming ;  and  the  first  intimation 
we  have  of  such  evil  habits  being  upon  them,  we  see  them  under  the  influence 
of  liquor.  My  practice  is,  when  I  see  a  young  man  of  my  acquaintance 
under  the  influence  of  liquor,  to  go  right  to  him,  and  say  to  him,  "  I  perceive 
that  you  have  been  drinking.  Where  did  you  get  your  liquor  ?  How  does 
this  happen  ?  I  expected  something  better  of  you."  Well,  he  declines  telling 
me  where  he  got  it,  but  he  got  it  in  some  sly  place  ;  and  my  conviction  has 
been,  and  still  is,  that  if  we  must  have  the  evil  we  had  better  have  it  in  open 
daylight  when  we  can  see  its  workings,  and  take  hold  of  it  and  handle  it 
understandingly. 

Q.  What,  during  the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years,  has  been  the  progress  of 
temperance  or  of  intemperance,  in  the  section  of  the  State  in  which  you 
live,  the  western  part  of  Massachusetts  ? 

A.  I  think  that  I  cannot  speak  truthfully,  upon  that  subject,  without  say- 
ing that  among  the  younger  men  intemperance  has  increased. 

Q.     What  can  you  say  in  regard  to  the  quantity  of  liquor  sold  and  drank  ? 

A.  I  cannot  speak  as  to  that ;  I  have  no  means  of  knowing  the  quantities 
sold  or  drank. 


APPENDIX.  347 

Q.  What  is  your  observation  of  the  operation  of  the  State  agency  in 
your  own  town  ? 

A.  I  know  but  little  about  the  State  agency.  We  have  little  to  do  with  it 
at  present  in  our  town.  I  will  relate  a  brief  sketch  of  history  in  connection 
with  the  State  agency.  Previous  to  1860,  so  far  as  I  know,  the  municipal 
authorities  had  been  accustomed,  under  the  law,  to  appoint  a  liquor  agent,  a 
town  agent,  and  obtain  liquor  of  the  State  Agent,  and  place  it  in  the  hands  of 
the  town  agent  to  be  sold  to  the  people  according  to  the  law.  There  were 
complaints  that  bad  work  was  made  of  the  agency,  and  it  was  unquestionably 
true  ;  I  know  it  to  be  true.  A  great  many  complaints  were  made  about  bad 
liquor.  I  had  no  means  of  knowing,  personally,  about  the  quality  of  the  liquor 
previous  to  that  time.  I  am  not  in  the  habit  of  buying  any  liquor,  and 
therefore  not  able  to  judge  of  its  quality.  In  1860,  it  fell  to  my  lot  to  be 
Chairman  of  the  Municipal  Board,  and  knowing  that  the  law  required  the 
appointment  of  an  agent,  I  endeavored  to  find  a  suitable  man  that  would 
answer  the  requirements  of  the  law  to  take  the  agency.  I  endeavored  to 
find  a  suitable  man  ;  I  could  not  find  any  such  person  in  the  town  who 
would  take  the  agency,  and  consequently  in  1860  we  had  no  agent, 
and  I  am  not  certain  that  we  had  in  1861 ;  I  think  it  is  likely  that 
we  had  not.  In  1862,  (if  my  memory  serves  me  rightly,)  the  Board  succeeded 
in  hiring  a  very  good  man,  (although  his  location  was  neither  central  nor 
convenient,)  and  ordered  a  quantity  of  liquor  from  the  State  Agent.  He 
sold  but  very  little,  and  found  the  agency  so  annoying  that  he  absolutely 
declined  to  have  the  trouble  of  it  another  year.  The  agency  and  the  liquor 
were  consequently  transferred  to  another  man.  After  the  liquors  went  into 
his  hands,  he  brought  the  Board  a  specimen  of  the  liquors  that  he  had 
received  from  the  former  agent,  and  wished  an  examination  of  the  quality. 

Q.     Was  an  analysis  made  ? 

A.  The  liquors  were  thought  to  be  so  bad,  that  we  ordered  a  specimen 
analyzed.  The  agent  afterwards  informed  me  that  he  carried  a  specimen  of 
the  liquor  to,  I  think,  Prof.  Sheppard,  of  Amherst  College,  and  had  it  ana- 
lized,  and  it  was  pronounced  unfit  for  use.  The  agent  inquired  what  should 
be  cfone  with  the  liquor,  as  he  did  not  want  to  poison  the  people  by  selling  it. 

Q.  Within  your  sphere  of  observation,  are  the  people  inclined  to  go  to  the 
agent  for  liquor  for  medicinal  purposes  ? 

A.  They  are  not  willing  to  do  it.  The  complaint  is  almost  universal, 
that  they  cannot  get  liquors  at  the  State  agencies  fit  for  use,  either  for 
sickness,  or  for  other  purposes. 

Q.  How,  then,  do  they  supply  themselves  -mth  what  is  needed  for  med- 
icine ? 

A.    I  do  not  know. 

Q.     How  extensive  is  that  feeling  ? 

A.  So  far  as  I  hear  any  feeling  or  opinion  expressed  upon  that  subject, 
(and  it  is  very  frequently,)  it  is  all  in  one  way, — that  the  liquors  kept  by  the 
agents  are  not  suitable  for  use. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  When  did  you  say  this  trouble  with  the  agency 
was? 


348  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  think  the  liquors  were  procured  in  1862.  I  formerly  had  the  impres- 
sion that  it  was  in  1861,  and  think  that  I  so  testified  before  the  Committee 
last  year  ;  but  I  now  think  that  it  was  in  1862. 

Q.     Are  you  sure  that  it  was  not  in  1860  ? 

A.  I  think  that  it  was  not  in  1860,  for  we  had  no  agent  in  1860.  I  was 
Chairman  of  the  Board  that  year,  and  know  full  well  that  I  absolutely 
declined  appointing  an  agent  unless  we  could  obtain  a  suitable  man. 

Q.     What  is  your  business  ? 

A.     My  principal  business  is  farming. 

Q.     Do  you  call  yourself  a  Methodist  minister  ? 

A.     I  am  in  a  sense;  but  I  am  not  supplying  a  pulpit  this  year. 

Q.    In  what  sense  are  you  a  Methodist  minister  ? 

A.  I  am  connected  with  that  church  as  a  minister,  but  for  the  present 
year  am  retired  from  pulpit  service. 

Q.     Why  are  you  retired  ? 

A.  The  condition  of  my  lungs  for  years  has  been  such  that  I  have  found 
it  impossible  to  preach  constantly,  and  have  said  to  the  authorities  of  the 
church  that  whenever  there  was  a  sufficient  number  of  clergymen  to  supply 
the  pulpits,  that  I  should  like  to  be  released  for  a  time  from  constant  service. 

Q.     Is  that  the  only  reason  ? 

A .  There  is  no  other  particular  reason.  I  am  still  at  the  pleasure  of  the 
church,  and  can  be  called  into  regular  work  at  their  option. 

Q.     Do  you  say  that  is  the  only  particular  reason  ? 

A.  There  is  no  disaffection  that  I  know  of.  I  know  of  no  reason,  except 
that  I  requested  to  be  released  from  regular  work  for  the  time  being,  and  that 
request  was  granted. 

Q.  Do  you  feel  sure  that  if  you  had  been  willing  to  take  an  appointment 
like  other  Methodist  ministers,  that  you  would  have  had  it  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  anything  to  the  contrary. 

Q.     You  say  that  you  are  opposed  to  this  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  am  not  particularly  opposed  to  it.  The  great  objection  to  the  law,  in 
my  mind,  is  that  the  people  decline  to  enforce  it.  I  am  in  favor  of  any  law 
that  will  suppress  the  evils  of  intemperance.  Any  enactment  of  the  Legisla- 
ture, that  the  people  will  take  into  their  own  hands,  and  use  effectually  for 
the  suppression  of  the  evils  of  intemperance,  I  am  in  favor  of. 

Q.     What  sort  of  a  law  do  you  think  that  would  be  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  The  general  impression  is  that  if  there  was  a  stringent 
license  law  it  would  be  more  satisfactory,  but  I  do  not  know  as  it  would  be. 

Q.  What  "  general  impression  "  do  you  speak  of?  To  what  community  or 
people  do  you  refer  ? 

A.     The  people,  generally,  in  my  own  community. 

Q.     Do  the  Methodists  in  your  community  want  a  license  law  ? 

A.  The  Methodists  in  my  community  want  something  that  will  apply 
effectually  for  the  suppression  of  the  evils  of  intemperance,  and  that  want  is 
not  peculiar  to  the  Methodists.  I  beg  leave  to  say  that,  as  a  clergyman,  I 
have  always  found  myself  upon  the  best  side  of  the  best  society  in  New  Eng- 
land, and  have  been  very  happy  to  be  there ;  and  as  a  business  man  and  min- 
ister and  member  of  the  Municipal  Board,  I  have  been  brought  in  contact 


APPENDIX.  349 

with  another  class  of  society,  and  have  necessarily  become  acquainted  with 
such  elements  as  I  never  could  have  become  acquainted  with  merely  as  a 
clergyman,  and  I  have  had  convictions  forced  upon  my  mind  that  probably 
never  would  have  been  forced  upon  my  mind,  had  it  not  been  for  these  cir- 
cumstances. 

Q.  You  say  that  the  community  in  general  want  a  different  law.  I  want 
to  know  exactly  how  it  is  with  the  Methodist  clergy  and  the  Methodist 
denomination.  Do  they  want  a  license  law  ? 

A.  I  am  not  aware  that  as  such  we  do,  or  that  any  other  church,  as  a 
church,  want  a  license  law. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  if  the  majority  of  the  Methodist  clergy  and  the  majority 
of  the  Methodist  brethren,  want  a  license  law  ? 

A.  As  to  the  Methodist  ministers,  I  am  not  aware  that  the  majority  of 
them  do.  I  am  aware,  that  as  such,  they  have  no  means  of  knowing  what 
law  will  best  accomplish  the  suppression  of  the  evils  of  intemperance.  They 
are  not  law-makers.  They  are  in  contact,  as  I  have  been,  with  the  best  side 
of  the  best  society,  and  know  but  little  about  what  is  upon  the  opposite  side. 

Q.  Then  you  are  better  informed  than  Methodist  ministers  in  general  upon 
this  subject  ? 

A.  In  some  respects,  I  am  necessarily  better  informed.  My  business  con- 
nections have  placed  me  where  I  have  been  compelled  to  be  better  informed 
upon  some  subjects  than  the  majority  of  Methodist  clergymen. 

Q.  Do  the  majority  of  Methodist  clergymen  go  through  the  world  with 
their  eyes  entirely  closed  ? 

A.     I  think  that  you  had  better  ask  them. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  whether  a  majority  of  the  Methodist  clergymen,  within 
your  own  knowledge,  are  opposed  to  this  and  in  favor  of  a  license  law  ? 

A.     I  cannot  speak  for  them,  but  my  opinion  is  that  they  are  not. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  anything  about  their  petitioning  for  or  protesting 
against  a  license  law  ? 

A.  I  presume  they  have  very  generally  protested  against  it.  I  know  that 
one  of  my  neighbors,  and  a  very  active  and  efficient  man,  told  me  that  he 
had  signed  a  petition,  and  was  in  favor  of  a  license  law. 

Q.  You  made  a  statement  that  the  community  generally  wanted  a  very 
stringent  license  law  ? 

A.     I  did  not  say  the  majority. 

Q.     You  said  the  "  community  in  general,"  did  you  not  ? 

A.  I  am  informed  that  out  of  800  voters  in  the  town  of  Amherst,  which  is 
my  place  of  business,  but  160  names  could  be  obtained  for  a  remonstrance.  I 
do  not  know  the  number  of  petitioners  in  that  town  for  a  license  law.  I  sup- 
pose that  the  petitions  and  remonstrances  are  in  the  hands  of  the  Committee, 
and  they  can  examine  them  for  themselves. 

Q.     Can  you  not  remember  the  number  of  petitioners  ? 

A.     I  have  never  seen  the  petition. 

Q.     Have  you  not  heard  the  number  stated  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  I  have. 

Q.    From  what  you  have  heard,  how  many  do  you  think  there  are  ? 

A.    I  cannot  tell  anything  about  it. 


850  APPENDIX. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EX-MAYOR  DANIEL  WALDO  LINCOLN. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  live  ? 

A.     In  Worcester. 

Q.  What  connection  have  you  had  with  the  government  of  the  city  of 
Worcester  ? 

A.    I  have  been  at  different  times  Alderman,  and  also  Mayor  of  the  city. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  of  the  practicability  of  enforcing  the  prohibitory 
liquor  law  in  the  city  of  Worcester  for  the  suppression  of  intemperance  ? 

A.  I  have  formed  my  opinion  upon  that  subject,  both  from  the  experience 
of  others  and  my  own  observation.  I  suppose  there  is  no  place  in  the  Com- 
monwealth— certainly  no  large  town — where  the  experiment  of  a  prohibitory 
liquor  law  has  been  more  thoroughly  tested  than  in  that  city.  Our  elections, 
four  times  out  of  five,  have  hinged  upon  presumed  views  of  the  candidates 
upon  this  question.  I  do  not  know  that  anything  more  could  have  been  done, 
than  was  done.  We  have  had  able  and  conscientious  men  in  office.  I  do 
not  know  what  measures  could  have  been  adopted  for  the  enforcement  of  the 
law,  better  than  those  which  have  been  tried.  I  suppose,  however,  that  there 
has  been  no  attempt  or  desire  to  stop  the  sale  of  liquors  by  first-class  hotels 
and  groceries  ;  but  with  that  exception,  I  think  that  every  means  has  been 
employed  which  I  conceive  could  be  used.  Agents  have  been  placed  at  the 
depots  of  the  railroads  of  this  city ;  they  have  been  placed  month  after  month 
in  all  the  depots  at  Worcester,  and  special  police  have  been  appointed,  charged 
with  the  execution  of  this  particular  law,  and  prosecutions  and  seizures  have 
been  made,  more  extensive  than  those  reported  in  the  papers  as  having  been 
made  by  the  State  Constabulary;  but  my  opinion  is  that  it  has  not  accom- 
plished the  purpose  ;  that  it  has  not  substantially  suppressed  the  sale  of  liquor 
nor  diminished  the  cases  of  drunkenness. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.^)  Do  you  think  all  the  city  officers  entered  into  the 
business  heartily  ? 

A.     I  think  they  did. 

Q.     Did  the  District- Attorney  ? 

A.     I  think  he  did,  as  did  also  the  Mayor,  Aldermen,  and  Marshals. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILDS.)  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  inform  the  Commit- 
tee of  the  feeling  and  practice  of  the  people  in  your  city,  in  regard  to  going 
to  the  State  agents  to  get  liquor  for  medicinal  purposes  ? 

A.  I  presume  it  is  done,  but  do  not  know  to  what  extent.  The  amount  of 
sales  reported  officially  to  the  government  is  very  small. 

Q.  Are  the  people  reluctant  to  go  to  the  agents  because  they  fear  they 
cannot  get  good  liquor,  or  that  fit  for  medicinal  purposes  ? 

A.    I  cannot  answer  as  to  that  matter. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     In  what  years  were  you  Mayor  of  Worcester  ? 

A.     In  1863  and  1864. 

Q.     Did  you  make  a  stringent  effort  to  enforce  the  prohibitory  law. 

A.  I  made  an  effort  to  enforce  that  law  as  I  did  all  other  laws.  I  suc- 
ceeded to  an  administration  that  made  a  very  stringent  effort,  and  in  view  of 
their  failure,  I  did  not  follow  entirely  in  their  footsteps. 

Q.  Does  your  memory  run  back  to  the  time  licenses  were  granted  in 
Worcester  ? 


APPENDIX.  351 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  recollect  whether  the  license  law  was  enforced  ? 

A.    In  what  respect  ? 

Q.  Were  those  who  sold  without  a  license  prosecuted  and  driven  out  of 
the  business  ? 

A.    I  cannot  tell ;  I  do  not  recollect. 

Q.     Did  the  license  party  strictly  keep  their  bonds  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  they  did,  sir. 

Q.     Did  anybody  try  to  make  them,  or  prosecute  them  for  not  doing  so  ? 

A.  I  would  not  like  to  be  understood  in  that  way.  I  think  the  officers 
were  careful  to  examine  the  character  of  men  to  whom  they  granted 
licenses,  and  in  the  manner  which  they  discharged  their  duties,  and  to  correct 
any  abuse  of  the  privilege. 

Q.    But  you  do  not  think  the  unlicensed  were  driven  out  of  the  business  ? 

A.     I  have  no  knowledge  about  that. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  those  who  violated  their  bonds  were  ever 
prosecuted  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  that  they  did  not  violate  them  constantly,  in  one 
way  or  another  ? 

A.    I  have  no  doubt  that  they  were  not  bound  very  tightly  by  them. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  that  the  license  law  did  anything  to  restrain  the 
liquor  traffic  ? 

A.     I  think  it  did,  sir.     I  think  it  restrained  the  traffic  somewhat. 

Q.    Was  the  traffic  diminished  in  consequence  of  the  license  law  ? 

A.  I  have  no  opinion  about  it.  It  was  so  long  ago  and  my  recollection  not 
having  been  called  to  it  lately,  my  opinion  would  not  be  worth  anything. 

Q.     What  sort  of  law  would  you  have  ? 

A.  I  have  no  scheme  of  my  own.  I  should  be  very  reluctant  to  abolish 
this  law  until  there  was  some  substitute  for  it.  I  should  like  to  see  the  experi- 
ment tried  of  a  license  law  engrafted  on  to  this  law. 

Q.  But  you  are  not  very  clear  about  the  law  you  would  have  engrafted  on 
this? 

A.  I  think  we  really  want  two  laws,  one  for  the  smaller  towns  and  another 
for  the  larger  towns  and  cities.  I  think  we  can  enforce  a  law  in  the  small 
villages  that  is  impracticable  in  the  large  towns  and  cities. 

Q.     Then  you  would  not  have  the  law  equal  everywhere  ? 

A.     There  must  be  a  general  law  of  course. 

Q.  Would  you  have  a  law  authorizing  the  people  of  each  town  or  city  to 
sell  it  or  not  as  they  chose  ? 

A.  I  would  not.  I  would  not  let  it  enter  into  the  elections  at  all.  We 
have  seen  the  effect  of  that  in  Worcester.  I  think  if  the  licenses  are  given  it 
should  be  by  some  committee  or  independent  board,  acting  under  a  general 
system. 

Q.  Suppose  you  had  such  a  commission,  would  you  allow  them  to  license 
in  Worcester  and  not  in  neighboring  towns  ? 

A.    I  would. 

Q.    You  say  this  law  is  adopted  in  the  smaller  towns. 


352  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  it  is  particularly,  bnt  I  think  it  can  be  substantially 
enforced  in  the  smaller  towns. 

Q.  I  asked  you  about  the  operation  of  the  license  law  in  Worcester.  Did 
you  ever  know  of  a  license  law  restraining  the  liquor  traffic  in  the  smaller 
towns  ? 

A.  I  have  never  seen  the  operation  of  that  law  in  any  small  town.  I  have 
never  lived  in  a  small  town. 

Q.  I  did  not  know  but  that  you  might  have  heard  enough  to  give  an 
opinion. 

A.  I  think  there  is  a  class  of  people  dealing  in  liquor  whom  it  would  be 
very  hard  to  restrain  by  any  law — the  profits  are  so  great.  The  reason  why  I 
would  prefer  a  license  law  is,  that  those  who  seek  to  enforce  it  would  have  the 
co-operation  of  the  men  engaged  in  the  traffic ;  the  licensed  men  are  with  you 
then.  In  an  attempt  to  regulate  and  control  the  sale,  I  was  always  aided  by 
the  dealers.  When  I  went  to  them  and  requested  them  to  shut  up  their 
houses  upon  a  Sunday  or  a  holiday,  I  never  failed  in  compelling  it  to  be  done. 
I  do  not  think  that  during  my  two  years'  administration  as  Mayor,  liquor 
•was  sold  to  any  extent  upon  the  Sabbath  day. 

Q.     Then  you  suppressed  the  sale  under  this  law  ? 

A.  I  controlled  it ;  it  ^as  a  matter  more  of  regulation  than  actual  sup- 
pression or  prohibition. 

Q.     Then  you  would  not  have  the  town  authorities  grant  licenses  ? 

A.     I  would  not ;  that  is  my  own  view  about  it. 

Q.  Supposing  you  had  a  commission,  how  would  you  grant  licenses  ?  For 
instance,  here  is  Boston  surrounded  by  four  or  five  cities,  would  you  think  it 
proper  or  the  best  thing  to  grant  licenses  in  Boston  and  refuse  to  license  in 
those  cities  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  think  if  you  license  at  all,  that  there  is  need  of  licensing  in 
large  cities  like  Roxbury,  Worcester  and  Cambridge. 

Q.  Would  you  grant  licenses  in  a  town  or  city  where  the  majority  of  the 
people  did  not  want  them  ? 

A.    It  would  be  a  matter  for  the  exercise  of  sound  discretion. 

Q,  Do  you  think  that  it  would  be  right  for  you,  if  you  were  the  commis- 
sioner, or  in  the  exercise  of  a  sound  discretion,  do  you  think  you  would  license 
a  person  to  sell  liquor  in  a  town  where  a  great  majority  of  the  people  did  not 
want  it  sold  ? 

A.    I  would  not. 

Q.  How  would  it  work,  supposing  Boston  did  not  license,  (and  for  a  great 
many  years  we  did  not  license  at  all,)  and  Charlestown  should  have  several 
liquor-shops  right  over  the  bridge  ? 

A.     I  think  if  the  city  of  Boston  can  get  along,  we  can  everywhere  else. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  JOHN  JONES  (continued.') 

Mr.  CHILD.  A  question  was  asked  you  concerning  your  standing  in  the 
Methodist  Church. 

Mr.  JONES.  I  do  not  know,  gentlemen  of  the  Committee,  as  the  gentle- 
man (Mr.  SPOONER,)  designed'  to  cast  any  reflections  on  me ;  I  do  not  know 
that  he  did  ;  I  simply  desire  to  state  a  matter  of  fact  in  relation  to  my  per- 


APPENDIX.  353 

sonal  history.  It  is  this :  that  ray  relation  to  the  Methodist  Church,  as  a  clergy- 
man, shows  a  clean  record.  I  want  to  tell  the  Committee  where  I  have  lived, 
and  what  I  have  been  doing.  My  first  year's  ministry  was  in  North  Reading, 
Middlesex  County,  where  I  took  up  the  subject  of  temperance,  and  lectured 
the  people  publicly,  and  was  told  that  it  was  the  first  lecture  upon  the  subject 
of  temperance  that  had  been  delivered  by  anybody  in  North  Heading  for  a 
series  of  years.  That  was,  I  think,  fourteen  years  ago.  The  year  following 
I  had  taken  a  location  in  the  Maine  Conference,  but  being  worn  out,  I  left  it 
with  the  intention  of  going  to  Illinois ;  but,  by  my  friends  residing  in  this 
State,  I  was  induced  to  remain  in  Massachusetts,  and  renewed  my  relation 
with  the  New  England  Conference.  As  to  my  character,  it  has  never  been 
called  in  question  in  either  the  New  England  or  Maine  Conference.  I  went 
from  Northampton  to  Leyden  by  appointment ;  from  Leyden  to  Pelham  by 
appointment.  Was  regularly  appointed  in  Pelham  three  consecutive  years ; 
was  then  regularly  appointed  at  South  Arnherst  for  five  consecutive  years ; 
then  regularly  appointed  at  North  Amherst,  residing  where  I  now  live,  for 
three  consecutive  years,  which  terminated  last  April.  At  my  own  request,  I 
was  then  put  upon  the  superannuated  list  for  the  present  year,  without  being 
responsible  to  supply  any  pulpit  regularly. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  GEORGE  B.  IDE,  D.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  at  the  present  time  ? 

A.     In  Springfield,  in  this  State. 

Q.     What  is  your  position  or  profession  ? 

A.    I  am  a  clergyman,  and  pastor  of  the  First  Baptist  Church. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  in  Springfield  ? 

A.    I  am  now  on  my  fifteenth  year — fourteen  years  last  October. 

Q.  With  your  opportunities  of  observing  the  operations  of  the  present 
prohibitory  liquor  law,  what  is  your  opinion  of  it  as  an  instrumentality  of 
checking  intemperance  ? 

A .  The  question  is  a  somewhat  difficult  one  for  me  to  answer,  as  I  was  for 
fifteen  years,  previous  to  going  to  Springfield,  pastor  of  the  First  Baptist 
Church  of  Philadelphia,  and  was  not  able  to  observe  the  progress  of  the  tem- 
perance cause  under  your  old  license  system,  and  therefore  not  competent  to 
compare  the  two.  For  more  than  forty  years,  I  have  been  a  total  abstinence 
man  from  all  that  can  intoxicate.  I  took  the  pledge  when  a  boy ;  I  have 
lived  up  to  it  and  for  nearly  that  whole  period  I  have  been  a  sincere  promoter 
of  the  cause  of  temperance.  In  Philadelphia,  under  a  license  system,  I  had 
the  opportunity  of  engaging  in  the  temperance  movement. 

Q,  Speak  of  what  you  know  of  the  operation  of  the  license  system 
elsewhere  ? 

A .  We  had  a  license  system  in  Philadelphia, — not  a  very  stringent  one,  I 
believe, — but  the  result  was  that  the  entire  Christian  community,  and  nearly 
all  good  citizens  were  embarked  in  an  earnest  effort  to  promote  temperance 
by  individual,  personal  endeavor  and  moral  suasion.  We  accomplished  very 
great  results.  Nearly  all  our  young  men  and  a  large  part  of  the  community, 
were  enlisted  in  the  movement.  About  that  time  the  Washingtonian  move- 
ment commenced,  and  a  lively  interest  upon  the  subject  of  temperance  was 
45 


354  APPENDIX. 

everywhere  manifested.  I  left  Springfield  and  came  to  Philadelphia  about 
that  time.  When  I  became  acquainted  with  the  position  of  the  temperance 
cause  in  Springfield,  I  was  very  much  surprised  to  find  the  entire  front  of  the 
battle  changed.  Apparently  the  great  point  aimed  at  in  Springfield  was  not 
personal,  independent  effort  to  save  young  men  from  intemperance,  but  to 
enforce  the  law.  If  there  was  a  temperance  meeting,  the  enforcement  of  the 
law  was  the  main  subject  of  consideration.  I  found  it  impracticable  to  get  up 
any  warm,  living,  active  interest  upon  the  subject  of  temperance  among  the 
members  of  my  church,  or  in  the  community  at  large.  The  general  feeling 
was  that  this  great  social  evil  had  been  placed  in  the  catagory  of  penal 
offences  by  the  law,  and  that  the  law  must  look  out  for  itself;  that  the  agents 
of  the  law  must  see  to  its  administration.  Time  and  time  again  I  have  gone 
into  the  movement  with  other  clergymen,  and  endeavored  to  get  up  a  feeling 
upon  the  subject  of  temperance  ;  sometimes  the  meetings  were  large  ;  oftener, 
however,  they  were  very  thinly  attended.  We  have  only  been  able  at  times 
to  awaken  a  livelier  interest  in  the  execution  of  the  law,  but  never  to  any 
earnest,  systematic,  broad  effort  to  reach  our  young  men  and  citizens  at  large, 
and  make  them  personally  interested,  not  only  in  their  own  reformation,  but 
in  the  reformation  of  others.  I  was  surprised  to  find  that  intemperance 
was  actually  more  rife  at  Springfield  among  the  class  with  which  I  came  in 
contact  than  with  any  class  with  which  I  came  in  contact  in  Philadelphia.  I 
am  sure  that  intemperance  has  increased  ever  since,  and  within  the  last  four 
or  five  years,  very  rapidly.  It  seems  to  me  that  every  effort  that  could  be 
made  has  been  made  to  execute  the  law.  We  have  elected  men  to  the  Police 
force  upon  the  express  condition  that  they  would  execute  the  law.  We 
organized  a  large  association  of  gentlemen,  agreeing  to  guarantee  protection 
to  the  officers  of  the  law  if  they  failed  in  bringing  to  conviction  the  parties 
arrested.  Yet  to  my  knowledge  there  has  not  been  a  single  man  convicted. 
When  a  man  was  arrested,  he  would  give  bonds  and  go  on  just  as  before. 
The  State  Constabulary  have  made  what  they  call  a  thorough  raid ;  they 
have  made  large  seizures,  but  the  very  men  from  whom  they  were  made  are,  I 
think,  going  on  as  earnestly  as  ever.  You  can  obtain  liquor  by  the  glass  at 
the  counters  of  those  men  just  as  you  could  before  the  seizure.  Such  is  my 
observation  of  the  state  of  facts  now.  I  do  not  know  how  much  worse  it 
would  be  were  there  no  prohibitory  law  ;  it  might  be  immeasurably  worse.  I 
speak  of  things  as  they  are.  I  can  only  say  that  in  Springfield  the  prohibitory 
law  does  not  stop  intemperance ;  does  not  suppress  the  sale  of  liquor  ;  that 
under  every  effort  to  enforce  it,  intemperance  and  the  sale  of  liquor  is  increas- 
ing. The  tendency  to  intemperance  among  our  young  men,  is  much  more 
prevalent  than  formerly.  The  middle-aged  men,  whose  habits  were  formed 
under  the  old  system  of  moral  suasion,  (when  every  man  under  a  sense  of 
responsibility  went  to  his  brother  and  tried  to  draw  him  to  truth  and  right- 
eousness,) are  more  firm ;  there  is  very  little  intemperance  among  them.  It  is 
among  the  young  men  who  have  grown  up  since  that  kind  of  effort  ceased, 
that  the  tendency  of  intemperance  is  greatest. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     Is  the  sale  of  liquor  open  in  Springfield  ? 

A.     It  is  about  as  open  as  the  doors  are. 

Q.     Are  the  bar-rooms  open  and  bottles  exposed  on  the  counters  ? 


APPENDIX.  355 

A.    I  cannot  say,  for  I  never  go  into  such  places. 
Q.    How  do  you  know  so  much  about  them  then  ? 

A.     From  general  observation. 

Q.    You  say  that  liquor  is  free  as  ever ;  you  are  very  confident  about  that  ? 

A.    If  you  lived  there  you  would  be  as  confident  as  I  am. 

Q.  You  spoke  very  confidently  about  it,  but  when  I  ask  you,  you  do  not 
seem  to  know.  I  want  to  know  if  the  sale  of  liquor  is  just  as  open  and  public 
as  it  ever  was,  and  if  it  is  entirely  open  and  public  ? 

A.  Perhaps  not.  Perhaps  some  means  are  taken  to  disguise  the  sale,  but 
still  it  is  sold  publicly.  You  can  go  into  any  drinking  saloon  in  the  city  and 
obtain  liquor  without  any  sort  of  restriction. 

Q.    Have  none  of  them  closed  and  given  up  the  business  ? 

A.    It  is  possible  that  such  cases  have  occurred. 

Q.    Do  you  not  know  that  there  are  ten  or  twenty  that  have  closed  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  that  one  has  closed  and  given  up  the  business. 

Q.    Do  you  know  that  they  have  not  V 

A.    I  do  not  know  that  they  have,  nor  do  I  know  that  they  have  not. 

Q.    Were  you  in  Boston  twenty-five  years  ago  ? 

A.     I  was  thirty  years  ago. 

Q.    What  was  the  state  of  temperance  here  then  ? 

A.    I  cannot  state  definitely,  for  I  have  no  distinct  recollection. 

Q.    What  was  it  in  Philadelphia  ? 

A.  In  Philadelphia,  when  I  first  went  there,  in  1838,  there  was  a  great 
deal  of  intemperance,  but  very  earnest  efforts  were  put  forth,  and  a  very  great 
check  was  given  to  it  for  fifteen  years,  so  that  the  state  of  society  was  very 
much  improved ;  still  there  was  more  or  less  intemperance. 

Q.    They  had  a  license  law  there  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    How  long  since  you  left  there  ? 

A.  Fourteen  and  a  half  years.  I  am  there  very  frequently  now,  but  have 
no  distinct  knowledge  in  regard  to  the  state  of  things  in  Philadelphia  at 
present. 

Q.    Was  the  license  law  enforced  when  you  were  there  ?          i      I    p    i»         ' 

A.    Not  fully. 

Q.    Was  it  to  any  extent  ?  I    . 

A.    Yes,  sir,  there  was  an  attempt  to  enforce  it. 

Q.    What  did  they  attempt  to  do  under  it  ? 

A.    They  attempted  to  close  all  unlicensed  grog-shops.         (    \  {  ^  |  ;]<•  (  )  j  £  \T 

Q.    Did  they  succeed  ?  \=; 

A.     To  a  certain  extent  they  did. 

Q.    To  what  extent? 

A.  I  cannot  say.  We  temperance  men  cared  very  little  about  the  law  or 
about  what  the  police  did.  We  relied  more  upon  our  personal  efforts  and 
upon  moral  sausion.  We  fought  our  battle  upon  that  base  and  paid  very 
little  attention  to  law  in  any  form  whatever. 

Q.    What  sort  of  a  law  would  you  have  ? 

A .  I  do  not  say  that  I  would  have  any,  for  I  have  very  little  opinion  of 
legal  defences  of  this  character,  because  they  must  necessarily,  from  the  very 


356  APPENDIX. 

constitution  of  human  nature,  be  inefficient.  I  think  the  grand  reliance 
should  be  upon  the  earnest  efforts  of  good  and  Christian  men  to  persuade 
everybody  to  temperance  as  we  try  to  persuade  everybody.  The  great  battle 
must  be  fought  upon  that  ground. 

Q.    Would  you  dispense  with  all  laws  against  crime,  and  trust  to  that  alone  ? 

A.     By  no  means. 

Q.     How  do  you  regard  the  morality  of  the  traffic  ? 

A.     I  regard  it  as  a  social  crime. 

Q.     Would  you  give  the  sanction  of  the  law  to  a  social  crime  ? 

A.     No,  sir;  I  would  not. 

Q,  But  you  say  that  the  sale  of  liquor  is  a  social  crime,  and  you  ask  for  a 
license  which  shall  give  to  that  social  crime  the  sanction  of  the  law.  Could 
you  with  such  convictions  give  a  license  for  the  sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  think  I  would  not.  I  suppose  I  would  have  the  same  objection  to  a 
license  law  that  I  would  have  to  a  prohibitory  law.  My  objection  to  the  pro- 
hibitory law  is  not  that  it  is  wrong  in  principle  for  the  State  to  prohibit  a 
practice  which  I  regard  as  a  social  crime,  but  my  doctrine  is,  that  because  of 
having  this  prohibitory  law,  good  men  have  begun  to  feel  that  the  law  must 
execute  itself.  If  we  had  no  law,  every  man  would  feel  that  he  would  have 
to  go  to  work  to  save  the  community,  as  we  do  to  save  sinners.  We  should  have 
Christian  men  putting  their  hearts  in  the  work,  instead  of  trusting  to  the 
police  as  they  now  do.  We  must  have  true  Christian  effort  to  do  good  in  the 
world. 

Q.     If  you  had  any  law,  then,  you  would  have  a  law  that  told  the  truth  ? 

A.    I  would. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  LEONARD  BACON,  D.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.    In  New  Haven,  Connecticut. 

Q.     What  has  been  your  position  and  calling  ? 

A.  I  have  been  pastor  of  the  First  Church  in  New  Haven  for  forty-two 
years. 

Q.     What  position  do  you  occupy  at  the  present  time  ? 

A.  I  am  now  the  retired  pastor  of  that  church,  and  for  the  present  year 
am  performing  the  duties  of  Professor  of  Didactic  Theology  in  the  Theo- 
logical Deparment  of  Yale  College. 

Q.  Have  you  in  the  State  of  Connecticut  a  prohibitory  law  similar  to 
ours? 

A.  We  have  in  Connecticut  what  is  called  a  prohibitory  law.  I  have  not, 
however,  recently  compared  that  law  with  the  one  which  you  have  in  Massa- 
chusetts, and  am  not  competent  to  say  how  far  the  two  are  identical.  I  sup- 
pose them  to  be  identical  in  principle  and  aim,  but  in  not  all  the  details. 

Q.  Have  you  observed  the  effect  in  New  Haven  of  your  own  law  since  its 
enactment  ? 

A .  For  the  first  few  months  after  that  law  went  into  operation,  some  of  its 
obvious  effects  were  very  good.  The  law  was  to  go  into  effect,  I  think,  the 
first  day  of  August,  1854.  The  men  who  had  been  engaged  in  the  sale  of 
intoxicating  drinks,  and  the  parties  who  were  their  customers,  laid  their  plans 


APPENDIX.  357 

to  defeat  the  intent  of  the  law.  For  a  week  before  the  first  of  August,  (if 
that  was  the  date,)  the  town  of  New  Haven  was  in  great  commotion.  The 
men  who  dealt  in  liquor  were  closing  up  their  business  very  ostentatiously. 
Temperate  and  intemperate  men  were  laying  in  their  stores  for  a  state  of 
siege,  and  carts,  with  demijohns  and  kegs,  were  in  motion  through  all  the 
streets.  The  people  were  pretty  well  supplied  for  a  few  weeks  or  months  or 
years,  according  to  their  habits  ;  for  some  people  have  such  habits  that  they 
could  not  be  supplied  in  advance  for  a  very  long  time.  The  administration 
of  the  law  there,  depends  upon  the  action  of  the  town.  If  I  recollect  rightly, 
it  requires,  to  begin  with,  an  appropriation  from  the  town  to  furnish  the  liquor 
to  the  town  agent ;  and  the  first  hitch  in  the  law  in  New  Haven  was  to  get  that 
appropriation  made  at  the  town  meeting.  I  went  to  the  town  meeting  several 
times,  and  stood  out  upon  the  green  to  be  counted  with  the  others  to  get  that 
appropriation,  and  until  that  appropriation  was  got,  the  people  of  course  must 
live  on  the  stores  that  they  had  laid  in.  There  was  not  a  drop  of  liquor  that 
anybody  knew  of  to  be  sold  in  the  whole  city  of  New  Haven.  The  policy  of 
the  opponents  of  the  law — the  dealers  and  their  allies — was  to  reduce  the  city 
by  that  siege,  and  compel  them  to  go  without  liquor  for  mechanical,  chemical, 
manufacturing,  medicinal  and  sacramental  uses ;  but  at  last  we  succeeded  in 
getting  the  appropriation,  and  the  selectmen  appointed  an  agent  according  to 
the  law,  and  a  very  good  man  he  was — a  deacon  in  one  of  our  Congregational 
churches  and  a  city  missionary.  How  well  qualified  he  was  to  carry  on  that 
business  I  do  not  know  ;  but  I  had  a  strong  impression  that  when  the  deacon 
went  to  New  York  to  lay  in  his  store  of  liquor,  there  had  been  a  notice  given 
there  that  there  was  a  Connecticut  deacon  coming  there  to  buy  liquor,  and 
they  palmed  off  on  him  such  liquor  as  would  answer  their  purpose.  I  do  not 
know  how  that  may  have  been.  During  the  winter  that  followed  there  was  a 
very  great  diminution  of  crimes  against  the  order  of  the  city.  Breaches  of 
the  peace,  fighting,  quarrelling,  certainly  decreased  just  for  that  winter.  We 
all  rejoiced.  I  had  never  petitioned  for  the  law,  believing  it  to  be  impracti- 
cable ;  but,  when  it  was  passed,  I  went  to  a  public  meeting  held  for  congratu- 
lation, and  rejoiced  with  the  rest,  and  gave  my  assurance  that  I  would  do 
what  I  could  in  aiding  to  maintain  the  law.  I  also  gave  testimony  in  regard 
to  its  workings  that  was  published.  A  man  came  from  Canada  collecting 
opinions  and  statistics,  and  I  gave  my  testimony  as  to  the  actual  working  of 
the  law  at  that  time.  At  the  next  town  election,  when  the  town  passed  from 
the  control  of  one  political  party  into  the  hands  of  another,  the  deacon  was 
dismissed  from  the  town  agency,  and  a  man  with  a  very  red  nose  appointed 
in  his  place.  By  him  the  agency  was  continued  one  year  more,  and  at  the 
next  town  meeting  a  vote  was  passed  to  close  the  "  town  grog-shop  "  as  it  was 
called,  and  it  was  closed  ;  and  from  that  day  to  this  there  has  not  been  a  drop 
of  any  distilled  spirits,  or  of  anything  under  the  name  of  wine,  of  lager  beer 
or  of  ale,  sold  in  the  city  of  New  Haven,  but  in  violation  and  contempt  of  the 
law.  There  is  not  a  church  in  New  Haven  that  celebrates  the  Lord's  Supper 
without  hiring  somebody  to  violate  the  law.  There  is  where  we  are  to-day 
under  a  prohibitory  liquor  law.  I  understand  that  a  movement  is  in  progress 
to  have  a  State  Constabulary.  I  do  not  understand  what  that  is,  but  suppose 
that  it  is  something  that  will  put  the  law  in  force.  I  believe  that  the  result  of 


358  APPENDIX. 

that  movement  will  be  a  political  revolution  in  the  State  of  Connecticut — a 
revolution  not  in  respect  to  our  local  politics  merely,  but  of  national,  and 
affecting  not  merely  the  welfare  of  the  State,  but  the  interest  of  the  nation. 
The  power  will  be  put  into  the  hands  of  an  entirely  different  set  of  men. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  of  the  practicability  of  promoting  the  temperance 
cause  by  prohibitory  legislation  ? 

A.  So  far  as  my  observation  iu  the  town  of  New  Haven  extends,  there  is 
more  intemperance  now  than  there-  ever  was  before.  I  think  that  since  the 
introduction  of  this  species  of  legislation,  the  interest  of  the  best  people,  in 
the  temperance  reformation  has  greatly  diminished.  I  think  the  progress  of 
that  reform,  by  means  of  voluntary  and  mutual  pledges  of  total  abstinence, 
has  been  entirely  interrupted.  A  new  issue  has  been  raised.  At  the  start 
of  the  temperance  reform,  the  question  was  :  "  Will  you  agree  with  me,  and 
with  others,  to  abstain  from  the  ordinary  use  of  ardent  spirits,  in  consideration 
of  its  mischief  in  the  community;  will  you  agree  with  me,  that  you  will  not 
drink  it  yourself,  nor  offer  it  to  your  workmen,  nor  to  your  servants,  nor  to 
your  guests,  nor  have  it  in  your  family,  as  an  ordinary  drink  ? "  That  was 
the  issue  then,  but  it  is  not  the  issue  to-day.  A  "  temperance  man"  to-day, 
in  our  language  in  Connecticut,  does  not  mean  a  man  who  personally  abstains, 
even  though  he  is  pledged  to  abstain,  but  it  means  one  who  upholds  the  pro- 
hibitory law,  and  I  believe  that  I  am  myself  hardly  considered  a  temperance 
man  because  I  am  not  understood  to  uphold  the  present  law  and  keep  it  on 
the  statute  book.  I  therefore  think  that  the  cause  of  temperance,  and 
especially  among  the  young  men,  is  not  making  progress. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  as  to  the  principle  lying  at  the  foundation  of 
this  system  of  making  the  sale  of  liquor  a  crime,  and  the  drinking  not  ? 

A.  My  theory  is,  that  getting  drunk  is  not  only  a  crime,  but  a  sin,  and 
that  the  drunkard  is  a  criminal ;  that  the  man  who  gives  or  sells  him  liquor 
is  an  accessory  to  his  crime,  and  that  therefore  the  accessory  should  be 
punished  with  the  criminal,  and  not  by  a  vicarious  substitution,  in  the  place 
of  him.  We  have  in  Connecticut  a  law  which  punishes  a  man  for  getting 
drunk  ;  it  came  down  to  us  from  the  olden  time  when  we  had  (what  are  now 
called),  the  "  blue  laws,"  and  that  law  is  executed.  In  the  police  reports 
each  morning  we  may  see  that  some  party  was  taken  before  the  city  court 
and  fined  for  being  drunk. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  it  a  sin,  or  a  crime,  under  all  circumstances,  not  to 
abstain  ? 

A.  I  think  there  has  never  yet  been  a  prohibitory  law  based  upon  that 
theory.  There  are  circumstances  where  it  is  not  only  not  a  crime,  but  a  duty 
to  drink.  It  is  the  duty  of  a  man  whose  health  requires  it,  to  take  a  glass  of 
ale,  or  wine,  or  beer,  or  brandy.  And  it  is  the  duty  of  those  who  would 
remember  Christ  according  to  the  words  of  His  institution,  to  drink  of  the 
cup  that  shows  His  blood.  In  those  cases  it  certainly  is  not  a  crime,  and 
certainly  is  not  a  sin.  The  ordinary  use  of  it  for  conviviality,  and  for 
excitement,  I  hold  to  be  wrong  because  of  its  general  consequences.  I 
do  not  at  all  believe  in  any  chemical  theory  of  temperance, — that  anything 
upon  which  the  natural  process  of  fermentation  has  passed,  is  a  poison, 
and  being  a  poison,  it  is  therefore  wrong  to  use  it.  It  seems  to  me 


APPENDIX.  359 

that  legislation  upon  this  subject  should  seek  to  repress,  to  the  greatest 
reasonable  extent,  to  the  greatest  practicable  extent,  the  ordinary  use  of 
drink  for  purposes  of  excitement  and  conviviality.  But  I  do  not  think  that 
a  wise  legislator,  framing  a  code  of  laws  for  any  other  than  an  imaginary 
republic,  like  that  of  Plato,  would  undertake  to  meddle,  by  way  of  legislation, 
with  such  details  of  domestic  life,  as  to  say  what  a  man  should  put  upon  his 
table,  or  use  in  his  family  by  way  of  diet.  My  impression  is,  that  not  only 
in  the  New  England  States,  but  in  all  the  States,  drunkenness  has  ever  been 
held  to  be  one  of  the  offences  against  society,  and  that  whatever  can  be  done 
to  effectually  suppress  it,  should  be  done.  There  was  one  effect  of  our  law 
which  I  have  not  mentioned.  The  shutting  up  of  all  taverns,  and  of  every 
place  of  that  kind,  thereby  making  it  impossible  to  purchase  liquor  in  small 
quantities,  or  in  any  quantity  without  going  to  New  York,  at  once  led  to  the 
formation  in  our  city,  of  clubs  of  young  men,  (and  of  men  who  were  not  so 
young),  having  their  club-rooms,  and  with  stores  of  liquor  for  convivial  use, 
secreted  in  their  club-rooms,  and  those  clubs  have  been  a  prolific  source  of 
demoralization. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  If  I  understood  you  rightly,  in  speaking  of  the 
deacon  who  went  to  New  York  for  liquor,  you  conveyed  the  idea  that  he  was 
a  professed  temperance  man,  but  attempted  to  supply  himself  liberally  with 
liquor  at  New  York  ? 

A.  Not  at  all;  the  idea  that  I  meant  to  convey  was,  that  he  did  not 
understand  good  liquor,  and  therefore  could  not  get  a  good  supply.  That 
was  my  impression  at  the  time. 

Q.     He  was  practically  a  temperance  man  ? 

A.  He  was,  and  an  earnest  working  temperance  man  ;  a  man  whose  char- 
acter was  above  suspicion.  I  know  that  if  I  was  appointed  agent,  I  should 
certainly  be  imposed  upon  by  the  liquor-dealers,  and  I  had  an  impression  that 
the  deacon  was  sold  in  the  same  way,  but  I  am  not  sure  of  it. 

Q.    You  would  not,  then,  assume  the  position  of  State  Agent  ? 

A.  I  would  not  like  to  assume  the  responsibility  of  being  taster  and  tryer 
for  the  State. 

Q.  You  say  that  the  law  has  not  had  any  effect  in  restraining  or 
preventing  intemperance  ? 

A.  I  do  not  attend  upon  the  Courts  of  Law  or  upon  the  Police  Court,  but 
I  see  the  reports  of  cases  tried,  and  I  do  not  think  that  there  has  yet  been  a 
trial  of  a  complaint,  or  a  prosecution  for  selling  liquor,  in  any  of  our  courts 
at  New  Haven.  Soon  after  the  law  went  into  effect,  or  rather  into  non- 
efiect,  there  was  an  attempt  made,  if  I  remember  rightly,  to  shut  up, 
by  the  law,  one  or  two  very  bad  saloons.  The  keepers  were  prosecuted, 
and  the  consequence  was  that  one  of  the  most  respectable  apothecaries 
in  the  town  was  prosecuted  for  violating  the  law.  Since  then  I  believe  that 
there  have  been  no  attempts.  We  have  a  state  of  law  there,  by  which  the 
lowest  and  worst  keeper  of  a  saloon  can  say,  "  I  do  not  break  the  law  any 
more  than  the  man  who  keeps  an  apothecary  shop." 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  attribute  the  formation  of  drinking-clubs,  to 
the  existence  of  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.    That  is  my  impression. 


3GO  APPENDIX. 

Q.     In  what  way  does  the  law  operate  to  produce  that  effect  ? 

A.  The  law  permits,  I  think,  the  purchase  of  liquor  in  the  original  pack- 
ages. Wealthy  people  could  go  to  New  York  and  buy  their  champagne  or 
brandy  from  the  importers,  in  the  original  packages,  and  bring  it  home. 
There  is  no  traffic  ;  it  goes  into  their  cellars  and  is  ready  for  use.  The  clubs 
would  operate  in  the  same  way. 

Q.  You  say  that  the  law  is  not  enforced,  and  yet  it  has  driven  people  to 
New  York  to  buy  in  the  original  package  ? 

A.  I  spoke  of  the  first  months  when  it  was  enforced.  The  law  appeared 
to  operate  for  a  little  while  beautifully,  but  did  not  interfere  with  the  forming 
of  these  clubs. 

Q.     You  are  going  to  have  a  State  Constabulary  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  about  that ;  I  understand  that  an  attempt  is  being  made 
to  have  them. 

Q.     You  say  that  you  could  not  legally  buy  wine  for  sacramental  purposes  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  a  time  when  you  could  buy  such  an  article  in  this 
country,  as  the  wine  our  Saviour  drank  and  gave  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  am  pretty  sure  that  the  time  has  been,  and  now  is,  when,  if 
there  was  no  law  against  it,  such  wine  could  be  bought, — wine  manufactured 
in  our  own  neighborhood. 

Q.     Can  you  not  get  that  without  interfering  with  the  law  ? 

A .  I  think  not,  unless  we  manufacture  it  ourselves ;  but  the  church  does 
not  want  to  run  a  vineyard  and  wine-press,  although  both  institutions  are 
scriptural. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  you  ever  had  wine  from  across  the  water;  and  used 
for  sacramental  purposes  in  New  Haven,  that  was  not  enforced  or  adulterated  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know;  I  have  never  had  any  analyzed;  but  I  presume  that 
the  wines  that  are  imported  are  in  some  way  enforced  or  strengthened. 

Q.     All  of  them  ? 

A.  I  presume  they  are.  I  do  not  know  whether  or  not  they  could  be  im- 
ported without  it,  although  I  have  seen  advertisements  of  wine  imported  ex- 
pressly for  sacramental  purposes  that  was  not  enforced.  I  do  not  know 
whether  our  church  officers  ever  procured  such  wines  or  not. 

Q.  Then  you  could  not  get  the  same  article  that  our  Saviour  used,  before 
the  operation  of  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  never  thought  that  the  half  teaspoonful  of  wine,  consumed  by  each 
communicant  at  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  was  a  matter  in  which 
the  homeocpathic  quantity  of  brandy  or  alcohol  which  might  possibly  be  con- 
tained in  it,  was  worthy  to  be  searched  out. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  cannot  now  get  the  article  that  the  Saviour  used 
without  violating  the  law,  and  probably  could  not  before  the  law  was  passed  ? 

A .  Probably  not.  I  remember  hearing  a  deacon  of  my  church  say,  at  the 
beginning  of  the  temperance  reformation,  that  when  he  purchased  wine  for 
the  sacrament,  he  followed  this  rule :  he  purchased  good  wine,  because 
those  who  knew  good  wine,  would  not  think  of  it  when  they  tasted  it,  and 
those 'that  did  not,  would  not  think  of  it.  He  tried  to  procure  an  article 
which  would  never  raise  a  question  in  the  mind  of  the  communicant,  as  to 


APPENDIX.  361 

what  it  was.    I  suppose  that  is  as  near  as  we  can  approximate  the  design 
of  the  institution. 

Q.     What  law  would  you  prefer  to  the  present  ?  , 

A.  A  good  many  years  ago,  I  declined  signing  petitions  (which  was  one 
of  the  regular  duties  of  a  temperance  man,)  for  new  laws.  They  had  in 
Connecticut,  as  long  ago  as  I  can  remember,  a  law  which  was  called  a  license 
law,  and  I  made  up  my  mind  after  several  experiments  with  that  law,  that 
what  was  most  needed  to  work  a  reformation,  was  not  alteration  and  changes 
of  the  law,  but  a  public  opinion  that  Avould  carry  into  full  effect  the  law  we 
already  had,  according  to  the  theory  upon  which  it  was  passed.  The  law  we 
then  had  was  one  which  permitted  the  civil  authorities  of  each  town  to  license 
such  persons,  as  they  thought  to  be  trustworthy,  as  retailers,  but  the  retailer 
was  not  allowed  to  sell  anything  for  the  purpose  of  being  consumed  upon  the 
premises,  but  he  might  sell  in  small  quantities  to  persons  who  wanted  it  to 
carry  home.  Certain  persons  were  also  licensed  to  keep  tavern,  but  the  law 
prohibited  the  tavern-keeper  from  selling  to  minors  and  students,  and  from 
permitting  the  people  of  the  town  from  tippling  at  his  house,  and,  in  short, 
prohibited  him  from  selling  liquor  at  all,  except  to  guests,  to  travellers,  and  to 
regular  boarders.  That  was  the  theory  of  the  law  ;  what  was  most  needed 
was  such  a  reformation  in  public  sentiment  as  would  carry  it  into  stringent 
operation.  It  was  in  operation,  and  had  advantages  above  the  present  sys- 
tem. I  would  prefer  that  to  the  present  law,  because  that  was  a  restraint; 
this  is  not. 

Q.     Was  that  law  enforced  ? 

A.     To  a  very  considerable  extent  it  was. 

Q.     To  what  extent  ?     How  many  men  were  licensed  in  New  Haven  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say.  Upon  the  first  Monday  in  January  of  each  year,  tho 
civil  authorities  of  the  town,  namely,  the  selectmen  and  justices  of  the  peace, 
had  a  meeting,  and  one  of  their  duties  was  to  designate  such  persons  as  should 
be  intrusted  with  a  license,  and  those  persons  who  were  licensed  to  sell  in  less 
quantities  than  five  gallons,  of  course,  had  an  interest  in  seeing  that  no  person 
without  a  license  should  be  permitted  to  sell.  It  created  an  interest  in  main- 
taining the  law,  in  every  vendor.  The  taverns,  also,  were  watchful  of  the 
unlicensed  dram-shops.  I  know  that  from  time  to  time  we  had  prosecutions 
against  those  who  unlawfully  sold,  and  raids  made  upon  them,  and  I  think 
with  better  effect  than  any  prosecutions  or  raids  under  the  present  law.  I  do 
not  say  that  that  law  was  my  ideal  of  a  law.  I  think  that  the  basis  of  any 
law  upon  this  subject,  should  be  a  recognition  of  the  crime  and  sin  of  drunk- 
enness ;  and  that  the  law  should  give  protection  to  the  family,  to  the  wife  and 
children  of  the  drunkard,  or  to  the  parent  of  a  boy  or  young  man  who  is 
contracting  intemperate  habits.  It  should  give  every  possible  redress  in  the 
way  of  civil  remedy  to  those  who  suffer  from  the  traffic,  and  it  should  decree 
punishment  for  violations  of  the  law  by  such  penalties  as  can  be  exacted. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  Have  you  knowledge  of  the  operations  of  a 
prohibitory  law,  elsewhere  than  in  New  Haven  ? 

A.    I  cannot  say  that  I  have  any  personal  knowledge.     I  have  inquired  if 
the  same  state  of  things  existed  in  Hartford,  and  am  told  that  they  still  kept 
up  the  town  agency  there. 
46 


362  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  the  prohibitory  law  is  being  enforced  in  any  part 
of  Connecticut  ? 

A.  I  have  been  told  that  in  Windham  County,  where  there  are  no  cities, 
the  law  is  enforced ;  but  I  do  not  know.  So  I  have  been  told  repeatedly, 
that  it  is  enforced  here  in  Boston.  You  may  take  a  hill-side  town,  where  the 
population  is  not  over  five  hundred,  and  the  probability  is  that  there  is  no 
liquor  sold  in  that  town ;  and  it  is  comparatively  easy  where  there  are  no 
groceries,  or  anything  else  sold,  to  hinder  the  sale  of  ardent  spirits ;  and  as 
the  people  must  go  to  the  next  town  to  make  all  their  purchases,  it  is  no  incon- 
venience for  them  to  have  the  law  enforced  in  their  own  town.  In  such  places 
as  that,  I  presume  that  the  law  is  pretty  well  enforced. 

Q.     Is  it  enforced  in  any  entire  county  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  I  will  not  speak  from  reports,  as  I  have  learned  to 
distrust  such  reports. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)     At  what  time  were  licenses  first  granted  ? 

A.  I  think  the  granting  of  licenses  has  continued  from  time  immemorial. 
A  license  law  continued,  I  think,  until  1854.  After  the  temperance  move- 
ment began,  there  was  a  great  outcry  made  against  the  wickedness  of  licensing 
men  to  sell  liquor ;  and  people's  heads,  I  think,  got  a  little  muddled  upon  that 
subject,  until  at  last  an  attempt  was  made  to  entirely  suppress  the  sale  by  the 
prohibitory  law,  which  in  Connecticut,  transfers  the  traffic  from  individuals  to 
the  State  itself. 

Q.     AVhat  was  the  population  of  New  Haven,  forty  years  ago  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was  about  nine  thousand,  and  twenty  years  ago,  I  think  the 
population  was  not  far  from  twenty  thousand. 

Q.     How  many  do  you  think  were  licensed  then  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say,  but  I  should  think  that  forty  years  ago  they  might  have 
licensed  twenty  or  thirty  men  as  retailers,  not  as  tavern-keepers. 

Q.     Tavern-keepers  were  licensed,  in  addition  to  that  number  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Would  you  be  surprised  if  twice  that  number  were  licensed  then  ? 

A.    1  should  be,  decidedly. 

Q.  Suppose  that  fifty  were  licensed  in  a  town  of  nine  thousand  inhabitants ; 
•what  sort  of  restraint  could  be  exercised  by  such  a  law  ? 

A.  There  was  nothing  at  that  time  to  hinder  an  intemperate  man  from 
getting  his  bottle  filled,  and  carrying  it  home,  until  the  man  was  placed  under 
the  law  and  people  forbidden  to  sell  to  him.  There  is  nothing  of  that  kind 
now  in  the  law.  A  man  was  considered,  under  that  law,  competent  to  take 
care  of  himself.  I  believe  that  there  is  no  law  to  hinder  a  man  from  walking 
on  a  railroad  track,  but  the  theory  of  the  law  is,  that  if  a  man  has  not  got 
wit  enough  to  keep  out  of  the  way  of  a  train  of  cars,  he  had  better  be  run  over. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  how  it  is  possible  to  restrain  the  traffic  under  a  license 
law? 

A.  I  should  say  that  under  such  a  law  as  we  had,  what  was  most  wanted 
was  an  aroused  feeling  or  conviction  upon  the  part  of  the  aggregate  commu- 
nity, that  the  sale  of  ardent  spirits  was  more  dangerous  than  it  was  supposed 
to  be;  and  that  therefore  the  number  of  persons  licensed  to  sell  it  by  retail, 
should  be  diminished,  and  their  responsibility  to  the  law  increased ;  that  the 


APPENDIX.  363 

number  of  taverns  should  be  limited,  and  that  licenses  for  the  sale  of  liquor 
should  not  be  given  to  eating-houses.  It  was  the  grand  weakness  of  that  law, 
(as  I  suppose  it  is  of  the  prohibitory  law,)  that  the  aggregate  moral  sense  of 
the  community  did  not  sustain  it. 

Q.  Then  you  had  exactly  the  same  trouble  with  a  license  law  that  you 
have  with  a  prohibitory  law, — public  sentiment  did  not  sustain  it. 

A.  Just  so  fast  as  public  opinion  was  aroused,  our  temperance  reformers 
switched  it  off  on  a  new  track  and  tried  to  get  a  new  law,  instead  of  sustaining 
the  old  one.  We  had  a  succession  of  new  laws,  until  now  we  have  the 
ne  plus  ultra  in  the  shape  of  the  Maine  Law.  The  liquor-dealers  are  satisfied 
with  it,  because  it  is  just  what  they  want,  and  the  temperance  people  are 
bound  to  be  satisfied  with  it,  because  they  got  it,  and  are  pledged  to  stand 
by  it.  Under  the  old  license  law  we  had  succeeded  in  getting  the  public 
roused  to  the  idea  that  the  ordinary  use  of  liquor,  for  refreshment,  for  excite- 
ment, for  purposes  of  hospitality  or  conviviality,  was  mischievous,  and  persons 
by  thousands  were  pledging  themselves  to  abandon  it.  The  present  law  was 
enacted,  a  new  issue  was  raised,  and  to-day  the  issue  was  not  whether  such  a 
use  of  liquor  is  dangerous  or  detrimental,  but  whether  the  use  of  it  shall  be 
suppressed  in  this  particular  way. 

Q.  You  say  that  in  New  Haven  a  man  who  does  not  go  for  the  prohibitory 
law,  although  he  is  practically  a  total  abstainer  from  the  use  of  liquor,  is  not 
now  called  a  temperance  man  ? 

A.  I  rather  think  so, — that  such  a  man  is  not  considered  to  be  quite 
sound. 

Q.  Now,  Doctor,  you  are  a  man  of  note  and  character ;  do  you  really 
mean  to  say  that  in  Connecticut  a  total  abstinence  man  is  not  called  a  tem- 
perance man  '? 

A.  Day  before  yesterday  I  was  invited  to  appear  before  this  Committee. 
I  had  some  hesitation  about  coming.  I  had  already  positively  refused  to 
come,  but  I  received  another  invitation,  in  which  it  was  stated  that  the  honor- 
able gentlemen  of  the  Committee  requested  that  I  would  come,  so  I  took 
advice.  Some  of  the  gentlemen  with  whom  I  advised  thought  that  I  would 
suffer  damage  in  character,  and  perhaps  the  institution  with  which  I  am 
connected  might  suffer  by  my  appearing  here.  In  that  connection,  it  was 
intimated  that  I  had  already  suffered  in  that  way ;  that  it  was  a  common 
report  that  I  was  not  a  temperance  man,  because  I  had  expressed  my  want 
of  confidence  in  the  efficacy  of  the  prohibitory  liquor  law. 

Q.  I  want  an  answer  to  my  question.  Is  not  a  man  who  is  known  to  be  a 
total  abstinence  man,  although  opposing  the  prohibitory  law,  called  a  .temper- 
ance man  in  New  Haven  ? 

A.  He  calls  himself  a  temperance  man,  and  is  called  a  temperance  man 
by  others,  but  I  think  that  in  a  temperance  convention  he  would  be  denounced 
as  unsound,  and  not  up  to  the  mark  on  the  subject  of  temperance. 

Q.  You  have  three  Ex-Governors  in  your  State, — Ex-Governors  Buck- 
ingham, Dutton  and  Hawley ;  I  presume  you  are  personally  acquainted  with 
them  all  ? 

A.    We  have  two  more, — Tom  Seymour  and  Gov.  Toucey. 

Q.    They  agree  with  you  in  sentiment,  do  they  not  ? 


364  APPENDIX. 

A.     I  think  not, — neither  of  them. , 

Q.     They  go  for  free  rum  ? 

A.  For  "  free  rum," — at  least  I  remember  that  Gov.  Seymour  did  in  his 
inaugural  message. 

Q.    Do  you  know  the  gentlemen  I  have  named  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    They  are  all  respectable  men  ? 

A.     Of  the  very  highest  character -and  standing. 

Q.     They  are  all  men  of  good  sense  ? 

A.     Some  of  them  have  uncommon  good  sense. 

Q.     Have  not  all  ? 

A.     They  will  all  pass  as  having  uncommon  good  sense. 

Q.     Do  you  know  the  opinion  of  either  of  those  gentlemen  upon  this  law  ? 

A .  I  do  not  know  what  the  present  opinion  of  Gov.  Dutton  is.  I  know 
that  two  years  ago  he  attended  a  temperance  convention  at  Saratoga  Springs, 
and  committed  himself  very  strongly  upon  the  subject ;  but  if  he  were  here 
to-day  I  doubt  whether  he  would  give  exactly  the  same  testimony  that  he  did 
then. 

Q.    Why? 

A.  Because,  I  think  that  he  has  considered  the  matter  more  fully  since 
then,  and  is  better  aware  of  the  impossibility  of  enforcing  the  law.  If  I 
remember  rightly,  he  said  at  Saratoga,  that  it  was  practicable  to  enforce  the 
law. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  he  is  in  favor  of  a  State  Constabulary  in 
Connecticut  ? 

A.    I  do  not. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  either  one  of  those  gentlemen  are  opposed  to  the 
prohibitory  law  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  it. 

Q.    Do  you  know  that  they  all  have  been  at  sometime  ? 

A.  Gov.  Hawley,  I  think,  was  elected  Lieutenant-Governor  upon  that 
issue. 

Q.  You  know  that  they  have  all  been  in  favor  of  the  law  at  one  time,  but 
you  do  not  know  that  any  of  them  have  altered  their  opinion  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  it. 

Q.  But  you  think  that  as  men  of  sense  they  ought  to  alter  their  opinions 
upon  that  law  ? 

A.     I  think  they  should. 

Q.  Is  not  that  the  great  trouble  with  men  of  sense  in  this  world, — they 
won't  think  as  we  do  ? 

A.  Sometimes  they  do  ;  all  men  of  sense,  however,  are  not  of  the  same 
sense. 

Q.     Have  you  ever  travelled  in  foreign  countries  ? 

A.     To  some  extent. 

Q.  What  have  been  your  observations  in  regard  to  the  use  of  wine  in 
other  countries,  and  its  effect  upon  the  people  ? 

A.    I  cannot  say  that  I  am  an  expert  upon  that  subject. 

Q.    But  you  have  observed  ? 


APPENDIX.  365 

A.    I  have  observed  a  little  in  Mohammedan  countries. 

Q.    How  was  it  there  ? 

A.  I  was  told  by  missionaries  that  the  Mohammedans,  under  a  prohibitory 
liquor  law,  were  dying  out  by  drunkenness.  I  remember  a  Mohammedan 
merchant  of  Mosul,  who  would  get  through  his  business,  and  go  home  and 
reel  into  his  harem  drunk.  That  was  perhaps  the  result  of  too  much  trade 
with  the  dealers  in  distilled  liquor  at  the  Levant.  I  recollect  that  the  morn- 
ing after  I  arrived  at  Mosul,  there  came  into  the  house  a  Dervish,  a  most 
religious  looking  fellow,  in  his  way,  who  was  drunk  at  the  time,  and  appealed 
to  our  servants  for  some  of  the  "  red  stuff"  that  he  said  the  Franks  were  accus- 
tomed to  drink.  I  merely  travelled  across  France.  J  was  in  Paris  but  a  very 
few  days  ;  I  was  also  in  Rome  a  few  days.  I  did  not  see  any  drunkenness  there. 
I  recollect  one  day,  while  walking  about  the  streets  of  Paris,  of  seeing  a  man 
who  was  so  intoxicated  that  he  could  not  walk  a  straight  line  ;  but  I  saw  no 
man  lying  in  the  public  places  drunk.  I  ascribe  it,  however,  not  so  much  to 
the  fact  that  wine  is  cheap,  as  I  do  to  the  fact  that  they  have  in  Paris  very 
strict  police  surveillance,  and  I  suppose  that  travellers  merely  passing  through 
the  country  cannot  learn  much  about  the  habits  of  the  people. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  introduction  of  pure,  simple  wine  would  be  a 
blessing  to  this  country  ?  Have  you  formed  an  opinion  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  that  I  have.  At  the  same  time,  I  think  that  the  intro- 
duction of  distilled  liquors  has  increased  drunkenness,  and  all  its  evils, 
prodigiously,  I  think  also,  that  persons  who  have  formed  habits  of  drunken- 
ness by  the  use  of  distilled  liquors,  can  easily  keep  them  up,  and  perhaps 
aggravate  them  by  the  superabundant  use  of  fermented  liquors.  I  cannot 
say  what  would  be  the  effect  of  the  introduction  of  cheap  wines  into  a  country, 
the  people  of  which  are  so  addicted  to  all  kinds  of  excesses  as  are  the  people 
of  the  United  States. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Was  not  the  subject  of  prohibitory  legislation 
brought  up  for  consideration  in  the  National  Orthordox  Congregational 
Council,  held  in  this  city,  two  or  three  years  ago  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  remember  the  action  of  the  Council  upon  it  ? 

A.  The  subject  of  temperance,  or  of  temperance  reform  was  referred  to  a 
committee — a  very  respectable  committee,  but  whose  names  I  cannot  recollect 
— and  towards  the  close  of  the  session  they  reported  some  resolutions,  one  of 
which  contained  an  endorsement,  so  to  speak,  of  the  prohibitory  liquor  law. 
I  had  never  appeared  in  public  as  a  dissenter  from  that  law,  but  I  felt  at  the 
moment,  that  the  Congregational  ministers  and  churches  of  the  United  States 
ought  not  to  be  committed  to  so  doubtful  a  policy,  and  I  rose  and 
expressed  my  feeling,  and  moved  that  that  clause  of  the  report  be  stricken 
out.  Without  much  debate,  with  but  a  few  words  of"  protest,  it  was  stricken 
out.  It  would  have  been  passed,  and  passed  unanimously  probably,  (for  that 
is  the  way  that  such  resolutions  pass  in  such  bodies,)  if  some  one  had  not  been 
rational  enough  to  blurt  out  his  opposition.  My  motion  to  strike  out  passed, 
and  the  resolution  passed,  as  amended,  and  then,  almost  immediately  after, 
there  was  a  motion  to  reconsider,  in  order  to  restore  the  clause,  but  it  was 
voted  down,  and  after  1  left  I  understood  that  there  was  yet  another  motion, 


366  APPENDIX. 

which  also  failed.  That  action  does  not  imply  that  a  majority  of  that 
council  were  opposed  to  the  policy  of  a  prohibitory  law,  but  it  does  imply  that 
a  man  may  be  an  Orthordox  Congregational  minister,  in  good  standing  in  an 
Orthordox  Congregational  church,  also  in  good  standing,  and  not  believe  in 
the  Maine  Law  ;  that  it  is  not  a  reason,  stands  vel  cadentis  ecclesice. 

Q.  Allow  me  to  ask,  whether  New  Haven,  taken  as  a  community, 
entertains  any  such  respect  for  this  prohibitory  law  of  Connecticut  as  to  render 
it  in  any  proper  sense,  a  public  testimony  of  the  people  ? 

A.  I  should  think  not.  I  should  think  that  the  law  as  it  stands  upon  the 
statute  book  does  not  represent  the  general  sense  of  the  half  million  of  people 
in  Connecticut.  I  should  think  that  it  never  did — not  even  when  it  was 
enacted.  I  think  that  it  was  passed  by  a  collusion  of  political  parties,  to  gain 
a  little  additional  tenure  of  power — a  little  longer  lease  of  life.  I  think  that 
it  was  passed,  with  the  expectation  of  a  great  many  men  who  voted  for  it, 
that  it  would  not  long  continue  to  be  enforced.  Furthermore,  I  think  that 
provisions  were  put  into  that  law  for  the  express  purpose  of  defeating  it. 
For  instance,  lager-bier  was  made  intoxicating,  by  statute.  There  was  a  very 
powerful  Know  Nothing  element  in  the  legislature  that  enacted  that  law,  and 
such  a  clause  arrayed  the  German  population  against  the  law.  Something 
has  been  said  here  in  regard  to  having  the  laws  speak  the  truth.  I  think  this 
law,  standing  upon  our  statute  books  to-day,  is  really  a  falsehood.  I  know  of 
no  worse  law  on  the  statute  book  than  one  which  says  that  such  and  such 
actions  are  criminal,  and  they  shall  be  punished  so  and  so,  while  those  actions 
are  perpetrated  continually  in  the  face  of  day,  and  are  not  punished. 

Q.  As  a  student  and  teacher  of  morals  for  many  years,  is  it  not  y6ur 
opinion,  that  such  legislation,  especially  upon  such  a  subject,  tends  to  public 
demoralization  ? 

A.  My  conviction  is  that  this  law  does  tend  to  popular  demoralization. 
Such  has  been  my  conviction  ever  since  the  law  went  into  operation,  and  I 
feel  it  more  and  more. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  say  that  such  a  law  demoralizes  the  commu- 
nity ;  do  you  not  believe  that  the  liquor  traffic  for  the  ordinary  purposes,  is  an 
evil  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  think  that  the  traffic,  for  the  ordinary  purposes,  and  as 
ordinarily  conducted,  is  an  evil.  And  the  problem  of  legislation  is  to  reduce 
that  evil  to  its  minimum. 

Q.  But  when  you  license  a  man  to  do  a  thing,  do  you  not  say  that  it  is 
right  and  proper  for  him  to  do  it  ? 

A.  "  Because  of  the  hardness  of  your  hearts,  Moses  wrote  unto  you  this 
precept."  It  is  legitimate  and  right  for  legislation  to  endure  what  it  cannot 
suppress  ;  but  to  aim  at  the  greatest  practicable  good  is  a  duty.  Moses  did 
not  venture,  with  Sinai  behind  him,  to  enact  our  law  of  divorce,  but  merely 
declared  that  if  a  man  uses  his  personal  liberty  to  send  away  his  wife,  he 
should  give  her,  as  the  Irish  servant  says,  a  "  char-aoter "  to  go  with,  and 
should  not  take  her  back  after  she  had  contracted  another  marriage.  That 
was  a  great  restraint  upon  the  previous  liberty  of  the  Bedouins.  I  could 
refer  you  to  chapter  after  chapter  of  legislation  predicated  upon  that  idea. 


APPENDIX.  367 

There  are,  at  the  present  time,  evils  which  cannot  be  repressed,  and  must 
therefore  be  reduced  to  the  narrowest  possible  limits. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  Moses  was  right  in  saying  that  they  might  divorce 
themselves  under  certain  circumstances  ? 

A.  He  did  not  say  they  might,  but  he  refused  to  say  that  they  should  not. 
He  recognized  the  right  without  giving  it.  He  only  declared  that  if  a  man 
had  a  wife,  and  was  displeased  with  her  and  sent  her  away,  he  should  give  her 
a  writing ;  but  if  he  gave  her  a  writing  and  sent  her  away,  he  should  not  take 
her  back  again  after  she  had  been  married  to  another  man.  Moses  limited 
the  previously  existing  civil  rights. 

Q.     I  ain  afraid,  Doctor,  that  you  are  not  sound  in  your  theology. 

A.    I  am  willing  to  be  examined  upon  that,  also. 

Q.  As  I  read  the  Scripture,  the  Pharisees  said  that  Moses  said,  "  Give  her 
a  writing  of  divorcement,"  and  that  he  said  that  because  of  the  hardness  of 
their  hearts. 

A.  The  Pharisees  did  not  say  that;  our  Saviour  said,  "Because  of  the 
hardness  of  your  hearts." 

Q.    Did  not  our  Saviour  rebuke  that  practice  ? 

A.  Exactly  ;  our  Saviour  did  not  come  as  a  legislator,  but  as  a  Revelator 
of  absolute  Truth. 

Q.    Did  He  not  say  that  it  was  wrong  ? 

A.    He  did. 

Q.    Did  He  not  say  that  Moses  was  wrong  ? 

A.    I  do  not  read  my  Bible  so. 

Q.    I  will  tell  you  how  I  read  it 

The  CHAIRMAN.    Let  the  witness  state  his  opinion. 

Mr.  SPOONER.    I  want  to  state  the  fact. 

Dr.  BACON.  If  Mr.  Spooner  wants  my  opinion  of  his  opinion,  I  will  give 
it. 

Mr.  SPOOXER.  What  I  want  to  know  is  this  :  You  stated  what  Moses  said 
and  did.  You  seem  to  think  that  because  of  the  hardness  of  their  hearts, 
Moses  gave  them  authority  to  do  what  in  itself  was  wrong.  I  want  to  ask  if 
our  Saviour  did  not  rebuke  that  and  say  that  Moses  was  wrong  in  saying  what 
he  did  ? 

A .  Our  Saviour  said  that  divorcing  was  wrong,  but  he  never  implied  that  the 
statute  of  Moses  was  not  the  best  that  could  be  made  under  the  circumstances. 


TESTIMONY  OP  EX-MAYOR  J.  C.  BLAISDELL. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  CHILD.)    Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.    In  Fall  River. 

Q.    What  is  your  business  ? 

A.    Practising  lawyer. 

Q.     Have  you  been  connected  with  the  city  government  of  Fall  River  ? 

A.    I  have,  sir.    In  the  years  1858  and  '59, 1  was  mayor  of  Fall  River. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  of  the  practical  workings  of  the  present  prohib- 
itory law,  and  the  practical  enforcement  of  it,  from  what  observation  you  have 
had? 


368  APPENDIX. 

A.  Well,  sir,  there  are  two  or  three  prominent  reasons  why  I  hare  formed 
the  opinion  that  I  entertain  with  reference  to  it,  the  first  of  which  is  that  the 
effort  to  enforce  it  is  in  its  very  nature  a  very  demoralizing  one,  demoralizing 
upon  all  who  have  the  enforcement  of  the  law,  or  the  effort  to  enforce  it, 
intrusted  to  their  keeping.  In  these  cases,  men  whom  we  can  rely  upon  in 
other  affairs  of  life,  men  whom  we  regard  as  truthful  men,  when  summoned  in 
a  case  where  the  question  is  as  to  whether  a  man  keeps  a  nuisance,  or  as  to 
whether  a  man  is  a  common  seller,  OP  a  violator  of  the  law  in  any  form,  being 
themselves  the  parties  who  may  have  received,  in  the  very  places  charged 
with  being  nuisances,  intoxicating  liquors  or  other  beverages,  which  they  may 
or  may  not  claim  to  have  been  intoxicating,  they  are  unwilling  to  testify. 
They  are  utterly  unwilling  to  say  that  they,  at  such  a  time,  and  under  such 
circumstances,  bought  liquor  of  such  a  man  in  such  a  place,  knowing  what  the 
effect  of  their  testimony  must  be.  Ordinarily,  in  the  other  avocations  of  life, 
where  any  other  criminal  transgresses,  it  is  not  so.  In  another  respect  it  is 
demoralizing,  in  the  extraordinary  means  that  are  being  resorted  to  in  order 
to  enforce  the  law.  And  (what  is  most  extraordinary)  not  willing  that  the 
law  should  be  enforced  as  any  other  criminal  law  is,  standing  for  its  enforce- 
ment upon  the  common  judgment  and  conscience  of  the  people  as  to  its  rec- 
titude and  right,  the  juries  must  be  sifted,  and  we  must  have  an  extraordinary 
police  force  in  the  Commonwealth ;  and  they,  with  extraordinary  powers, 
must  have  the  right  to  go  where  ordinary  policemen  would  not  feel  at  liberty 
to  go,  and  to  make  such  examinations  as  ordinary  policemen  would  not  feel 
authorized  to  make  ;  and  all  under  the  pretence  that  they  suspect  that  intox- 
icating liquors  are  sold  in  certain  places.  Mr.  A.,  or  Mr.  B.,  who  is  known  to 
be  a  radical  man,  is  willing  to  subscribe  for  the  purpose  of  issuing  a  search 
warrant.  He  does  not  know  anything  about  it,  but  he  is  willing  to  put  his 
hand  to  a  search  warrant,  and  say  that  he  believes  that  intoxicating  liquors 
are  and  have  been  sold  in  such  a  place.  With  such  a  warrant,  the  constable 
goes  and  makes  a  search  of  the  place  and  finds  nothing,  not  even  a  smell  of 
liquor.  I  think  it  is  demoralizing.  It  learns  people  to  distrust  the  govern- 
ment under  which  they  live,  and  to  suspect  the  men  with  whom  they  come  in 
contact,  and  to  produce  a  feeling  of  unquiet  and  a  feeling  of  distrust  as  to 
whether  this  is  the  right  way  to  enforce  a  law  of  the  Commonwealth  that  ought 
to  rest  upon  the  sound  judgment  and  common  sense  of  the  community.  So  far 
as  its  practical  enforcement  is  concerned  in  our  own  State,  I  have,  for  the  last 
year,  taken  special  pains  to  make  inquiries  with  reference  to  it ;  and  I  observed, 
too,  as  to  what  its  practical  workings  were  under  the  State  Constabulary.  In 
July  last,  we  had  a  man  sent  to  our  community,  an  entire  stranger,  a  mere 
itinerant,  who  at  once  attempted  to  take  the  places  of  both  the  court  and  the 
city  government,  and  even  went  so  far  as  to  have  our  police  indicted  in  Sep- 
tember. Suffice  it  to  say  that  by  his  efforts  it  was  said,  publicly,  that  he  had 
shut  up  all  the  places  where  liquor  was  openly  sold,  and  that  all  the  prominent 
places,  where  heretofore  it  could  be  obtained,  were  now,  as  he  said,  dried  up. 
In  a  single  street,  I  recollect  that  he  made  particular  reference  to  the  success 
of  his  efforts.  In  a  part  of  the  city  called  Canal  Street,  when  he  came  there, 
there  were  said  to  be  several  places  where  liquor  was  sold,  or  could  be  had ; 
and  in  November,  just  before  the  cloud  which  he  is  now  laboring  under,  he 


APPENDIX.  369 

said,  in  the  city  hall,  that  there  was  no  place  there  where  liquor  could  be  had. 
Having  heard  of  that  statement,  and  having  occasion  to  encounter  him  fre- 
quently, I  took  pains  to  ascertain  the  truth  of  that  statement,  and  I  found  this 
to  be  the  state  of  things  in  Canal  Street,  viz  :  In  July,  there  were  two  places 
where  liquor  could  be  obtained,  and  in  the  month  of  November,  there  were 
seven  places.  And  it  was  had  in  this  way.  •  Young  men,  boarding  in  that 
street,  would  get  together  in  clubs  of  five  or  six  in  a  house,  and  furnish  them- 
selves with  liquor,  and  go  in  and  spend  the  evening  in  the  back  part  of  the 
house,  and  drink  themselves  drunk  or  until  their  supplies  were  exhausted.  That 
is  the  fact.  And  yet  this  man  says  that  there  is  no  liquor  to  be  had.  The 
result  of  his  work  was  that  there  were  seven  places  where  young  men,  instead 
of  going  in  and  getting  a  glass  of  beer,  would  go  in  and  spend  the  entire  even- 
ing, drinking  themselves  drunk,  and  going  out,  to  be  picked  up,  probably,  on 
their  way  home  by  the  police,  and  found  in  the  police  court  next  morning 
charged  with  being  drunk.  And  as  it  regards  the  use,  there  was,  in  the  year 
ending  March  1,  1867,  a  larger  number  of  arrests  for  drunkenness  than  there 
was  for  the  year  ending  March  1,  1866,  including  in  the  year  1867  the  time 
that  the  State  Constabulary  were  at  work. 

Q.     Prior  to  that,  they  had  not  visited  you  ? 

A.  They  had  not.  I  believe  that  Major  Blood  was  the  first  man  to  make 
his  appearance  in  our  community. 

Q.     Is  drunkenness  on  the  increase  at  present  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  regret  extremely  to  say  it.  It  is  done  in  this  way  :  instead 
of  being  openly  done  (and  the  condition  of  things  in  Canal  Street,  is  a  fair 
illustration  of  pretty  much  all  the  streets),  there  are  no  open  bars,  unless  you 
have  the  peculiar  knock  that  will  open  the  door,  unless  you  have  got  the 
particular  rap  that  is  understood  ;  but  they  have  these  associations  where  they 
go  in  the  darkness  of  the  night,  and  where  they  sit  until  midnight,  until  they 
come  out  substantially  manufactured  drunkards.  Now  my  opinion  is  that  we 
can  meet  these  evils  in  the  daylight  better  than  we  can  in  the  darkness  of 
night. 

Q-  What  is  your  opinion  with  regard  to  some  law  which  shall  control  and 
restrain  the  sale,  instead  of  prohibiting  it,  as  a  beverage. 

A.  Formerly  I  was  very  much  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law.  I  supposed 
that  it  was  going  to  make  clean  work,  and  that  it  was  going  to  produce 
precisely  the  results  which  it  was  said  it  would  produce.  But  it  is  right  the 
reverse.  And  I  said  several  years  ago  that  the  law  did  not  accomplish  what 
it  was  anticipated  that  it  would  accomplish;  and  although  I  am  a  total 
abstinence  man,  yet,  whenever  this  question  comes  up,  I  am  called  a 
"rummy."  And  so  it  is  with  every  other  man  that  dares  to  express  his 
opinion. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  this  system  of  legislation  in  dividing  the  friends 
of  temperance  in  co-operation  by  moral  means  ? 

A.  Sad,  sir,  very  ;  for  the  manifest  reason  that  when  the  friends  of  tem- 
perance come  together  for  the  purpose  of  putting  in  operation  a  series  of 
moral  means  and  moral  forces,  to  the  end  that  they  may  affect  the  hearts  and 
consciences  of  men,  and  so  secure  their  judgment,  instead  of  doing  that,  the 
first  thing  is, — "  Are  you  for  the  Maine  Law  ?  "  "  Shall  this  law  be  enforced  ?  " 
47 


370  APPENDIX. 

That  is  the  great  idea.  You  must  enforce  the  Maine  Law.  If  that  is 
called  in  question,  why,  it  is  said,  "  You  are  not  with  us."  Consequently  the 
tendency  is,  between  parties,  to  divide  and  cause  a  lack  of  co-operation. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     How  long  were  you  Mayor  ? 

A .     In  1858  and '59. 

Q.     Did  you  attempt  to  get  the  traffic  under  ? 

A.     I  did,  sir. 

Q.     What  success  did  you  have  ? 

A.  I  met  with  entire  success  so  far  as  any  known  open  places  were  con- 
cerned. But  allow  me  to  say  that,  when  we  had  no  open  places  in  our  city, 
the  result  was  that  people  would  go  over  the  line,  and  fill  their  demijohns 
and  bottles  and  jugs,  and  bring  them  down  to  the  various  places  of  resort, 
and  there  exhaust  their  supplies. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)    What  is  the  line  you  refer  to  ? 

A.     The  line  between  us  and  Rhode  Island. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  did  succeed,  then,  so  far  as  open  places 
were  concerned  ?  Did  you  ever  know  of  any  such  a  state  of  things  under 
the  old  license  law  ? 

A.     I  am  not  quite  old  enough,  sir,  to  tell  much  about  that. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  a  license  law  restraining  the  traffic  at  all  any- 
where ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  about  that,  sir.  I  have  no  knowledge  about  it  at  all. 
I  am  only  speaking  from  my  experience  in  reference  to  the  prohibitory  law, 
so  far  as  I  know.  I  think  that  almost  any  law  is  better  than  the  present  one. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  McCLELLAN.)  What  would  have  been  the  result  if  they 
could  not  have  gone  to  Rhode  Island  and  got  the  liquor  ? 

A.     They  would  have  got  it  somewhere  else. 

Q.     Suppose  that  they  could  not  have  got  it  in  the  other  towns  adjoining  ? 

A.  They  would  have  taken  more  pains,  but  they  would  have  got  it  some- 
where. 

Q.     Substantially  you  think  the  law  cannot  do  anything  ? 

A.  It  has  not  done  anything  substantially  as  we  see,  but  intemperance  is 
is  on  the  increase. 

Q.     You  convey  the  idea  that  the  law  cannot  be  carried  out  ? 

A.  1  would  not  say  that  it  cannot,  sir.  I  think  that  if  the  moral  sense  and 
the  common  conscience  of  the  community  was  up  to  the  enforcement  of  it, 
and  would  sustain  the  enforcement  of  it,  then  it  might  do  some  good. 

Q.     What  advantage  do  you  conceive  there  might  be  under  a  license  law  ? 

A.  I  think  that  a  license  law,  the  common  judgment  and  the  moral  sense 
of  the  community  would  sustain. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  FAY.)  In  the  country  towns  where  no  places  are  successful, 
would  the  amount  of  drinking  be  as  much  as  if  there  were  a  license  law  ? 

A.     I  hardly  think  it  would  in  the  sparsely  settled  towns. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  are  near  the  line  of  the  State  of  Rhode 
Island  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir  ;  further,  however,  than  when  I  was  Mayor. 

Q.     What  did  you  state  in  regard  to  the  carrying  out  of  the  law  ? 

A.    I  said  that  it  was  poor  enough,  but  that  it  was  far  better  than  formerly. 


APPENDIX.  371 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  Louis  LAPHAM. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.    In  Fall  River. 

Q.     What  position  do  you  occupy  ? 

A.    I  have  been  justice  of  the  police  court  for  some  fourteen  years. 

A.  What  is  your  observation  as  to  the  effect  of  this  prohibitory  law,  in 
checking  drunkenness  and  intemperance,  as  far  as  you  have  formed  an 
opinion  ? 

A.  When  the  law,  in  the  first  instance,  was  enacted,  it  was  put  in  force  in 
Fall  River,  and  the  number  of  seizures  made  was  quite  extensive,  amounting 
to  several  thousand  dollars'  worth,  and  which  was  subsequently  destroyed. 
After  the  law  was  put  in  operation  in  that  mode,  the  effect  was  to  break  up 
some  of  the  different  establishments,  and  another  effect  was,  that  individuals 
associated  together  and  purchased  liquors  and  kept  them  where  they  could 
go  and  help  themselves.  There  was  a  room  of  that  kind  which  joined  my 
office ;  and  in  this  association  were  a  number  of  individuals  known  to  me 
personally.  And  this  continued  for  some  weeks  and  some  months.  The  result 
of  the  association  thus  formed  was,  that  many  of  those  individuals  subsequently 
became  intemperate.  They  may  have  been  addicted  to  it  to  some  extent 
before,  but  some  of  them  were  not.  So  far  as  I  know,  two  or  three  of 
them  died  in  consequence  of  their  intemperance.  There  were  some  estab- 
lishments broken  up,  but  it  seemed  not  to  lessen  (with  now  and  then  excep- 
tions) the  principal  cause  of  drunkenness.  In  other  words,  the  effect  was  to 
distribute,  in  small  quantities,  in  different  places,  either  alcoholic  drinks  or 
beer,  or  something  that  would  produce  intoxication  by  some  means.  Precisely 
what  I  know  not,  except  that  the  result  did  not  seem  to  suppress  the  use  of 
liquor.  At  that  time  there  was  liquor  to  be  obtained  across  the  line  in  Rhode 
Island.  Since  that  it  has  been  changed,  to  a  considerable  extent,  because  the 
line  has  been  changed  and  carried  south  some  two  miles  and  a  half.  There 
was  some  interference  with  the  carrying  out  of  the  law,  until  the  question  of 
constitutionality  was  decided  in  the  case  of  Commonwealth  v.  Albro,  the  bill  of 
exceptions  in  which  I  had  the  honor  of  drawing,  and  which  stood  until  the  • 
case  got  into  the  higher  courts.  Occasionally  there  was  a  complaint  made, 
and  the  case  was  set  aside  to  await  the  action  of  other  cases,  in  order  that  the 
parties  might' get  at  a  thorough,  full,  and  fair  test.  During  the  war,  the  law 
was  practically  a  dead  letter ;  that  is,  either  by  common  acquiescence,  or  other- 
wise, in  the  condition  of  things  at  that  time,  there  seemed  to  be -a  harmony 
between  rum  and  patriotism  or  rum  and  enlistment.  They  went  on  without 
interference  either  from  our  strongest  temperance  men  or  others.  Since  the 
war,  there  has  been  a  commencement  of  seizures,  which  has  been  accompanied 
by  more  or  less  activity,  and  complaints  for  illegal  selling.  I  may  say,  that 
during  the  war  there  were  but  few  complaints  for  nuisances  or  for  illegal  sell- 
ing. There  have  been  some  efforts  during  the  year  by  which  some  establish- 
ments have  been  broken  up.  There  have  been  a  number  of  complaints  for 
illegal  selling,  and  convictions  have  been  obtained.  No  longer  ago  than  yes- 
terday there  were  six  cases  in  my  own  court.  Nevertheless,  intemperance 
does  not  seem  to  decrease.  The  fact,  so  far  as  I  can  ascertain  from  informa- 
tion and  observation,  seems  to  me  that  liquors  are  disseminated  in  small 


372  APPENDIX. 

quantities  in  different  localities,  and  tliat  people  or  individuals  addicted  to  it, 
congregate  in  the  night  or  day  in  a  clandestine  manner,  and  continue  to  use 
this  beverage,  and  use  it  in  such  a  manner  that  intemperance  results.  The 
number  of  convictions  varies  somewhat  according  to  the  season  of  the  year, 
and  in  some  seasons  more  than  others,  but  on  the  whole  the  number  of  convic- 
tions for  intemperance  is  as  great  in  proportion  to  the  population  now  as 
formerly.  I  am  not  able  to  state  the  exact  details.  There  is  another  circum- 
stance in  relation  to  this  matter  that  has  not  escaped  my  observation,  and  it  is 
this.  It  is  an  opinion  of  my  own.  I  think  that  is  a  terrible  evil,  or  whatever 
name  it  should  be  characterized  by ;  and  either  from  these  influences  or  some 
influences,  it  is  extremely  detrimental.  The  effect  upon  this  class  of  individ- 
uals, who  are  brought  up  for  intemperance,  seems  to  be  worse  than  it  was  when 
these  liquor  establishments  were  in  operation.  And  I  infer  from  what  infor- 
mation I  can  get,  and  from  the  observation  and  appearance  of  the  men  who 
are  brought  before  me,  that  it  is  a  very  deleterious  article  that  is  used. 
Whether  any  other  system  may  or  may  not  be  better,  I  can  only  say  that  it 
has  failed  after  an  earnest  effort  to  enforce  the  seizure  clause,  and  also  that 
part  of  the  law  in  relation  to  illegal  sale,  and  that  it  has  not  been  practically 
successful.  Whether  some,  other  system  would  or  would  not  be  better,  I 
cannot  say  until  it  is  tried. 

Q.     Have  you  any  agency  in  Fall  River  ? 

A.     There  is  an  agency,  sir. 

Q.  Is  there  any  inclination  on  the  part  of  the  people  to  go  there  for  liquor, 
or  to  get  it  at  other  places  ? 

A.  I  have  heard  individuals  say  that  in  cases  of  sickness  they  did  not  dare 
to  rely  upon  the  liquor.  There  was  one  case  brought  to  my  attention  partic- 
ularly not  long  since,  where  a  gentleman  stated  to  me  that  he  went  to  the 
agency,  and  got  some  liquor,  and  that  upon  examination  he  found  it  to  be 
defective.  And  I  know  of  many  individuals  who  have  made  such  statements. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  say  that  the  law  has  been  enforced.  That 
is,  it  has  stopped  the  open  sale,  and  has  driven  it  into  secret  places  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    It  seems  not  to  have  a  wholesome  effect  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now  it  is  supposed  that  a  man  who  is  in  the  habit  of  drinking  liquors 
will  take  any  paias  to  get  them  ;  but  do  you  suppose  that  men  frequent  these 
places  as  much  as  they  would,  if  the  places  were  open,  and  no  disgrace 
about  it  ? 

A.  I  think  that  men  do  frequent  these  places  secretly.  My  reasons  for 
this  are  that  frequently  one  or  more  of  them  gets  caught  in  a  state  of  intoxica- 
tion, and  is  brought  into  the  courts. 

Q.  Do  you  think  they  go  there  as  often  as  they  would  if  nothing  was  said 
about  enforcing  the  law  ?  Do  they  go  and  get  their  dram  as  often  as  they 
would  if  the  sale  was  more  open  ? 

A.  I  think  there  is  but  little  difference ;  and  I  will  state  my  reasons.  No 
longer  ago  than  last  night,  I  was  conversing  with  a  young  man,  and  he 
remarked,  in  allusion  to  this  subject,  "  By — ,  I  like  to  go  and  get  liquor  as  I 
choose."  I  merely  give  his  language  and  his  sentiment  as  an  illustration,  not 


APPENDIX.  373 

expressing  any  opinion  pro  or  con,  except  that  this  is  a  sentiment  which  I  have 
noticed.  As  a  simple  matter  of  fact,  there  have  been  seizures,  and  some  of 
these  places  have  been  broken  up.  This  I  know  to  be  the  fact,  as  I  know 
of  anything  that  occurs  in  the  city,  as  a  matter  of  observation.  And  I  know 
from  other  facts  :  I  am  connected  with  the  Washingtoniau  Association  there ; 
and  we  are  using  what  moral  efforts  we  can  in  reference  to  this  subject.  Not 
longer  ago  than  last  Sabbath  evening,  I  was  told  of  a  person  who  had  been  in 
the  habit  of  drinking,  who  had  attended  our  meetings,  and  had  determined  to 
abstain  from  the  use.  I  am  merely  speaking,  without  having  any  theory  to 
advance,  one  way  or  the  other,  as  to  the  practical  results  so  far  as  my  observa- 
tion extends.  I  think  that  the  practical  result  has  been  to  disseminate  the 
traffic,  and  distribute  it  among  a  greater  number  of  places  than  there  ever 
were  before. 

Q.  Does  that  lead  you  to  the  conclusion,  that  liquor  ought  to  be  sold  easily 
and  freely  ? 

A.  My  view  of  that  matter  is  this.  The  attempt  is  to  make  liquor  an  out- 
law. I  think  it  is  impracticable  in  its  results.  The  government  is  losing  all 
control  of  an  article  which  is  used  by  the  community,  and  used  by  individuals, 
which  is  intoxicating  in  its  character,  and  detrimental  and  pernicious  to  the 
health  of  the  community.  If  the  government  had,  in  some  way,  the  control 
of  this  article,  and  the  purity  of  the  article,  I  think,  as  a  matter  of  opinion, 
that  the  evils  of  the  sale  would  be  less. 

Q.  Is  not  the  effect  of  keeping  poisonous  liquors  just  the  same  as  in  any 
other  case  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  application  of  the  law  is  the  same.  If  the  liquor  could 
be  annihilated  or  extirpated  substantially,  I  would  be  glad  of  it.  But  the 
result,  as  far  as  my  observation  extends,  has  proved  that  it  is  impracticable  in 
a  community  such  as  ours.  Perhaps  in  the  towns  in  the  interior  portions  of 
the  State,  not  having  access  by  water  to  other  places,  the  law  might  be  more 
effective.  But  after  an  earnest  effort  to  enforce  the  law  on  this  subject,  and 
after  repeated  prosecutions  for  the  violation  of  it,  at  the  same  time  the  result, 
as  I  know  from  the  records  of  the  courts,  has  not  been  a  diminution  of  intoxi- 
cation as  a  whole. 

Q.     Who  carries  in  the  liquor  cases  in  behalf  of  the  government  ? 

A.     There  is  no  counsel  ordinarily  ;  occasionally  some  counsel  is  employed. 

Q.     Do  not  the  State  Constables  themselves  carry  on  the  prosecutions  ? 

A.     They  make  the  complaints  ;  they  do  not  carry  on  the  cases. 

Q.  Have  they  not  asked  you  to  allow  them  to  do  so,  and  you  refused 
them  ? 

A.     I  did. 

Q.     Do  they  not  carry  on  prosecutions  in  other  places  ? 

A.  I  only  know  that  the  statute  provides  that  they  shall  not.  If  the 
objection  is  made,  I  can  merely  say  that  I  have  sustained  the  laws  of  the 
Commonwealth. 

Q.    Is  there  an  express  statute  of  the  Commonwealth  ? 

A.     There  is. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  You  said  that  you  sentenced  six  persons 
yesterday  ? 


374  APPENDIX. 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Had  any  of  them  been  sentenced  before  for  similar  offences  ? 

A.  There  was  one  or  two  or  more  of  them  who  had  been.  The  allega- 
tion was  drawn  up  by  the  clerk  without  any  particular  examination  as  to  their 
being  second  offences,  and  it  was  defective. 

TESTIMONY  OP  P.  L.  PAGE. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.  I  reside  in  the  town  of  Pittsfield!  I  am  an  attorney  and  counsellor-at- 
law,  and  am  now  police  justice  in  our  county.  I  have  been  an  advocate  of 
the  prohibitory  law  from  the  start,  and  have  endeavored  in  my  practice  as  an 
attorney  during  the  last  eight  years,  and  as  police  justice,  to  carry  it  into 
effect.  I  must  say,  however,  that  my  experience  in  these  different  capacities, 
and  especially  in  the  latter,  as  police  justice,  has  compelled  me  to  alter  my 
opinion  upon  this  law  essentially.  For  some  time  after  the  law  was  enacted 
it  was  enforced  in  our  place  to  a  considerable  extent ;  and  it  was  deemed  dis- 
reputable about  that  time  to  sell  liquor  or  to  drink  liquor,  and  a  person  lost 
character  by  being  known  to  be  a  habitual  drinker  of  intoxicating  liquors. 
The  law  has  been  gradually,  from  year  to  year,  according  to  my  opinion,  less 
and  less  enforced.  There  have  been  occasional  waves  of  excitement  upon  the 
subject.  Some  new  man  would  be  in  an  official  position  and  would  expect  to 
do  what  his  predecessor  had  not  done,  and  for  a  time  there  was  perhaps  less 
liquor  sold ;  for  a  few  days  or  weeks ;  I  think  I  could  not  extend  the  time 
beyond  weeks  probably.  But  after  that,  the  liquor  shops  it  would  seem  were 
opened  with  redoubled  energy,  and  sold  more  than  ever;  so  that,  from  year 
to  year,  the  sale  and  use  of  intoxicating  drinks  has  increased  very  much 
according  to  the  number  of  the  population.  Our  population  has  nearly 
doubled  from  what  it  was  ten  years  ago.  And  we  have  been  somewhat 
unfortunate  in  our  Deputy  State  Constable.  A  few  months  ago  another  State 
Constable  was  appointed  in  our  town,  a  man  of  character,  a  man  of  respecta- 
bility, and  of  great  energy  and  business  talent ;  and  he  had  great  confidence 
that  he  could  revolutionize  the  matter  for  the  better;  and  all  good  people 
hoped  that  he  would  be  able  to  do  so.  He  commenced,  and  brought  (I  should . 
think,  if  my  memory  serves  me  right)  some  half  a  dozen  prosecutions,  and  he 
succeeded  in  getting  one  conviction  for  a  single  sale.  Before,  within  about  a 
year,  the  law  had  been  substantially  a  dead  letter  in  our  town.  And  I  must 
say  that  it  is  among  the  most  unpleasant,  and,  I  may  say,  sickening,  part  of 
my  duties,  to  sit  as  magistrate  in  the  trial  of  these  liquor  cases.  Young  men 
are  summoned,  eight  or  ten  or  twelve,  ordinary  respectable  looking  young 
men,  summoned  because  it  is  believed,  if  not  known,  that  they  go  into  these 
places  from  day  to  day  and  from  night  to  night,  just  as  regularly  as  they  do 
to  their  boarding  places.  And  these  young  men  will  be  asked,  "  Have  you 
been  into  that  shop  ?  "  Perhaps  they  may  say  that  they  have.  "  Did  you 
drink  anything  there  ?  "  "  No,  I  bought  a  cigar."  Another  is  asked,  "  Did 
you  drink  anything?"  "Why,  yes,"  he  may  say,  "I  drank  something.'' 
"  What  did  you  drink  ?  "  "  Well,  it  tasted  as  much  like  sweetened  water  as 
anything."  Another  is  asked,  "  Did  you  drink  anything  ?  "  "  Why,  yes,  I 
drank  some  pop  beer."  Or  perhaps  he  will  say  that  it  was  cider,  or  some- 


APPENDIX.  375 

thing  of  that  sort.  "  Was  it  intoxicating?"  " No,  I  guess  not."  And  that 
is  the  character  of  the  testimony,  in  perhaps  nine  cases  out  of  ten  that  come 
up  for  trial.  Of  course  it  is  not  proper  for  me  to  charge  anybody  with  per- 
jury, but  speaking  generally,  it  is  my  opinion  that  there  are  more  cases  of 
perjury,  so  far  as  my  observation  goes,  from  this  one  cause  than  from  all  other 
classes  of  cases  combined.  And  when  these  young  men  thus  testify,  there  are 
liquor-dealers,  and  liquor  sympathizers,  and  they  are  cheered,  as  it  were,  in 
that  course.  The  moral  feeling  of  all  the  towns  in  the  police  courts  in  our 
place  (I  hope  it  is  not  so  in  other  parts  of  the  Commonwealth)  is  in  favor  of 
screening  of  the  liquor-dealers  from  the  action  of  the  law.  Very  seldom  is 
there  a  temperance  man  in  the  courts  to  give  his  influence.  In  reference  to 
the  efforts  of  our  present  State  Constable,  I  have  heard,  since  I  came  to  this 
city,  that  he  had  resigned  his  position.  Whether  it  is  true  or  not,  I  am  unable 
to  say.  It  was  only  yesterday  that  the  deputy-sheriff  pointed  out  to  me  a 
place  that  was  very  brilliantly  illuminated,  and  he  says  to  me,  "  There  is  a 
liquor  saloon  just  opened,  and  fitted  up  beautifully,  at  an  expense  of  a  thou- 
sand dollars,  where  they  sell  openly."  And  pointing  to  another  place,  he 
said,  "  There  is  a  liquor  den  where  there  was  an  Irish  funeral  party  stopped 
to  get  liquor,  and  they  could  not  all  get  in  there,  and  they  actually  passed  the 
liquor  out  in  water-pails." 

Q.     I  would  inquire  if  you  have  a  liquor  agency  in  your  town  ? 

A.  We  have,  I  understand  ;  I  had  not  heard  of  it  at  all  until  a  few  days 
ago,  and  I  think  there  are  only  comparatively  few  who  know  where  it  is.  It 
was  a  matter  of  some  notoriety  in  the  early  history  of  this  liquor  law,  when 
the  town  pump,  as  it  was  called,  was  patronized  a  good  deal ;  and  there  was 
a  good  deal  said  about  the  liquor  that  was  vended  there ;  and  men  would  go 
to  other  places  where  they  could  get.better  liquor.  Of  late  years  the  State 
agency  in  our  place  is  a  dead  letter ;  perhaps  not  one  in  ten  knew  where  the 
agency  is,  or  who  the  agent  was. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  There  has  been  an  agency  there  always,  has 
there  not  ? 

A.    I  suppose  there  has  been,  though  I  have  not  known  who  the  agent  was. 

Q.  Why  did  you  say  that  they  could  not  get  the  liquor  ?  Do  you  suppose 
that  the  liquor-dealers  have  an  interest  to  get  up  this  idea  ? 

A.  I  did  not  say  that.  I  spoke  of  the  opinions  of  other  persons,  who,  I 
suppose,  knew  what  good  liquors  were. 

Q.  You  say  that  intemperance  now  is  greater  in  proportion  to  the  popula- 
tion? 

A.  I  said  that  the  population  had  increased,  and  I  intended  to  say  that 
intemperance  had  increased  faster  than  the  population. 

Q.  What  is  the  character  of  the  people  of  your  place  ?  Is  it  not  notorious 
that  many  of  the  leading  men  in  Pittsfield  are  men  of  doubtful  habits  in  that 
respect  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  that  they  are  more  doubtful  than  they  are  in  other  places 
of  the  same  size. 

Q.     What  remedy  do  you  propose  for  this  state  of  things  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  that  is  beyond  my  wisdom.  I  should  refer  that  to  the  wisdom 
of  the  Legislature.  I  am  not  wise  enough,  and  have  not  thought  enough  about 


376  APPENDIX. 

it  to  satisfy  my  own  mind  as  to  what  it  is  best  to  do  now.  The  very  general 
feeling  among  our  people,  I  think,  is  one  of  dissatisfaction  with  the  present 
state  of  things ;  and,  without  being  wedded  to  any  beautiful  theory,  they 
want  something  to  do  to  stop  this  increase  in  the  traffic. 

TESTIMONY  OF  CHASE  PHILBRICK. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)    Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.    In  Lawrence. 

Q.     What  position  do  you  hold  there  ? 

A.     City  Marshal. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  held  that  position  ? 

A.    Three  years  next  August. 

Q.  What  is  the  state  of  things  in  Lawrence  in  regard  to  the  sale  of 
liquors  ? 

A.  There  is  no  open  sale  that  I  know  of,  and  has  not  been  for  nearly  a 
year  and  a  half. 

Q.    What  is  the  state  of  intemperance  ? 

A.  It  has  been  constantly  increasing  for  the  last  three  years.  The  occa- 
sional instances  are  very  frequent.  In  1864  we  had  before  the  Police  Court, 
for  drunkenness,  three  hundred  and  ninety-seven  cases  j  in  1865  there  were 
five  hundred  and  seventeen  cases ;  and  in  1866  we  had  six  hundred  and 
eighty-one. 

Q.     Where  is  this  liquor  got  ?    Where  does  it  come  from  ?     Where  is  it  ? 

A.  There  are  a  great  many  places  in  Lawrence  where  it  is  kept  privately. 
Bars  are  kept  in  behind  kitchens  and  cellars,  and  kept  under  lock  and  key. 
In  June,  1865,  when  the  State  Constabulary  first  came  there,  I  gave  them  a 
list  of  all  the  places  that  were  known  to  the  officers,  the  names  and  the  num- 
bers of  the  street.  It  amounted,  I  think,  to  one  hundred  and  thirty-eight 
places  where  distilled  or  malt  liquors,  one  or  the  other,  were  sold  or  dispensed. 
Two  weeks  ago  last  Monday,  I  think,  I  gave  the  officers  instructions  to  give 
me  another  list  of  names  of  places  where  they  supposed  liquor  was  sold,  and 
they  gave  the  names  of  the  places  to  me.  The  number  amounted  to  one 
hundred  and  sixty-eight  of  these  groggeries. 

Q.     What  has  been  done  by  the  State  Constabulary  ?     Anything  ? 

A.  There  have  been  a  great  many  prosecuted  there — from  forty  to  sixty  I 
should  say — at  each  term  of  court  since  June,  1865. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  say  there  is  no  open  sale  ? 

A.    Not  any  that  I  am  aware  of. 

Q.     Do  you  not  attribute  this  to  a  great  extent  to  the  influence  of  the  war  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  do  not  think  the  soldiers  were  such  a  drunken  set  as  that, 
from  my  experience  with  them. 

Q.    What  do  you  attribute  it  to  ? 

A.  I  attribute  it  partly  to  the  kind  of  liquor  they  have  been  using,  and  the 
manner  in  which  they  have  bought  it.  Instead  of  going  to  a  saloon  or  a  bar 
and  buying  a  glass  of  liquor,  or  a  glass  of  beer,  and  going  home,  they  would 
get  into  one  of  these  groggeries,  and  buy  a  pint,  perhaps,  and  take  it  in  their 
pocket  to  some  place,  and  some  two  or  three  would  get  drunk  on  that  before 
they  got  home. 


APPENDIX.  377 

Q.  Then  you  hold  that  it  is  better  to  have  an  article  sold  free  than  it  is  to 
repress  the  sale  to  such  a  degree  as  you  can  repress  it  ? 

A.  It  is  my  opinion  that  there  would  not  be  so  much  drunkenness  as  there 
is  now. 

Q.     Would  you  repress  it  entirely  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  How  is  it  as  to  the  liquor  being  brought  in  there 
by  express  ? 

A.  I  see  a  great  many  packages  brought  in  by  express,  kegs  and  demi- 
johns, etc. 

Q.     Do  you  know  the  extent  of  this  ? 

A.     I  have  no  means  of  knowing  the  extent. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  FAY.)  If  we  had  a  license  law  would  you  favor  an  open 
bar? 

A.    Well,  I  can  hardly  say  as  to  that. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  The  law,  you  think,  seems  to  be  a  poor  one,  and 
it  drives  the  sale  out  of  sight  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;  but  we  get  it  in  the  police  court. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EX-MAYOR  WILLIAM  S.  MESSERVET. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.    In  Salem. 

Q.     What  position  have  you  held  there  ? 

A.    I  have  been  mayor  of  the  city. 

Q.    When  ? 

A.     In  1856  and  1857. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  inquire  as  to  any  observation  that  you  may  have  had 
as  to  the  attempts  to  suppress  intemperance  ? 

A.  As  that  was  some  time  ago,  I  will  read,  with  the  permission  of  the 
Committee,  my  report,  or  rather  my  observation,  coming  under  my  own  ex- 
perience, in  a  document  which  I  delivered  to  the  City  Council  of  Salem.  It 
covers  what  I  know  practically  and  experimentally  on  the  subject.  This  was 
January  26,  1857,  after  I  had  been  mayor  a  year : — 

"  The  whole  number  of  arrests  by  the  police,  during  the  year  ending  Dec. 
31st,  was  1,040.  Whole  number  of  prosecutions,  998;  of  this  number  604 
were  for  drunkenness.  Thus  it  will  be  seen  that  this  vice,  the  prolific  cause 
of  nearly  all  other  vices,  and  the  never-failing  source  of  the  larger  portion  of 
that  misery  which  is  so  apparent  to  those  whose  benevolence  or  duty  prompt 
them  to  visit  the  abodes  of  the  destitute  and  suffering,  if  not  increasing,  is 
certainly  not  diminishing.  Of  the  whole  number  prosecuted  for  drunkenness, 
only  five  disclosed  the  names  of  the  persons  from  whom  they  purchased  their 
liquor.  Eighteen  prosecutions  were  had  for  violation  of  the  liquor  law ;  thir- 
teen were  convicted,  and  five  acquitted.  I  desire  to  call  your  attention  to  the 
following  statement  in  the  Marshal's  report : — 

"  '  It  will  be  seen  that  now,  as  heretofore,  drunkenness  constitutes  a  large 
portion  of  the  crime  to  which  the  attention  of  the  police  is  called  ;  and  this 
will  continue  to  be  the  case  as  long  as  the  facilities  for  obtaining  strong 
drink  are  so  great,  and  the  repugnance  to  becoming  a  witness  in  liquor  prose- 
cutions so  strong.  It  will  also  be  seen  that  but  few  arrests  have  been  made 
not  followed  by  prosecutions ;  this  is  owing  to  the  fact,  that  in  all  arrests  for 

48 


378  APPENDIX. 

drunkenness,  no  descretion  is  left  with  the  arresting  officer,  the  law  making  it 
his  imperative  duty  to  prosecute  all  such  offenders.' 

"  In  view  of  this  condition  of  things,  it  becomes  us  to  inquire,  is  it  the  fault 
of  the  law,  or  of  those  whose  duty  it  is  to  enforce  it  ?  Drinking-houses  and 
tippling-shops  are  more  numerous  now  than  ever  before  in  this  city,  and  the 
victims  of  intemperance  force  themselves  upon  the  notice  of  the  officers  of 
the  law.  I  speak  of  that  which  I  know,  when  I  affirm  that  the  Chief  Mar- 
shal has  been  untiring  in  his  efforts  to  cause  prosecutions  for  the  violations  of 
the  liquor  law,  and  at  every  step  he  has  been  met  with  the  insuperable  diffi- 
culty of  obtaining  the  legal  evidence-  for  convictions.  Every  instrument  has 
been  employed,  except  illegal  force,  and  stipendiary  spies  and  informers ;  indi- 
vidual liability  barred  the  first,  and  the  dignity  and  efficiency  of  the  Depart- 
ment, and  the  moral  sense  of  the  community,  forbade  the  employment  of  the 
latter.  Those  who  complain  that  the  law  is  not  enforced,  do  not  understand 
its  provisions,  or  are  ignorant  of  its  operations.  The  law  in  its  effect  holds 
out  a  bounty  to  those  who  violate  it  in  the  enhanced  profits  of  the  traffic, 
and  induces  perjury  in  the  victim  when  forced  to  appear  as  a  witness  for  the 
prosecution,  and  whilst  it  does  not  lessen  the  number  of  those  who  sell,  it  in- 
creases the  number  of  those  who  purchase.  Constituted  as  society  is,  the  law 
in  its  practical  operation  is  a  melancholy  mockery,  and  a  solemn  farce.  Those 
who  think  otherwise,  should  sacrifice  considerations  of  personal  safety,  and 
brave  public  opinion,  and  make  attempts  to  furnish  the  necessary  evidence,  and 
thus  strengthen  the  power  of  the  officers  of  the  law,  whose  duty  it  is,  and 
whose  pleasure  it  will  be,  to  endeavor  to  cause  the  conviction  and  punishment 
of  the  offender." 

Q.     Do  you  continue  to  hold  these  opinions  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir  ;  I  have  seen  nothing  to  change  my  views. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     What  is  the  remedy,  in  your  opinion  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  it  is  merely  a  matter  of  opinion.  I  have  thought  some  upon 
it,  and  have  seen  considerable  of  life,  and  have  studied  somewhat  human 
nature.  If  I  were  a  legislator  I  should  look  at  this  evil  as  an  evil  which 
exists.  I  should  look  at  the  fact.  And  then  my  theory  of  government,  if 
there  is  any  legislation  in  the  case,  is  this :  that  when  an  evil  cannot  be  sup- 
pressed, it  should  be  controlled ;  and  I  know  of  no  way  of  controlling  an  evil 
like  this  except  by  a  judicious  license  law.  I  think  that  the  difficulty  of  the 
prohibitory  law  has  been  this :  that  it  has  undertaken  to  declare  and  punish 
as  a  crime,  that  which  the  moral  sense  of  the  community  at  large  does  not 
consider  as  a  crime.  I  consider,  also,  that  we  have  commenced  at  the  wrong 
end,  entirely.  If  it  is  a  crime  to  sell  liquor,  it  is  certainly  a  crime  to  buy  it. 
The  sale  cannot  possibly  be  made  without  two  parties  being  implicated  in  it. 
Now,  I  have  seen  it  stated  that  there  are  two  hundred  places  in  the  city  of 
Boston,  and  I  take  it  that  there  are  as  many  as  twenty  persons  who  get  their 
supplies  from  each  and  every  one  of  these  places.  I  think  that  the  penalty 
should  be  inflicted  on  the  persons  who  buy  the  liquor,  if  it  is  to  be  inflicted 
on  those  who  sell.  And  as  there  is  such  a  large  portion  of  the  community 
who  do  buy,  my  opinion  is  that  the  evil  cannot  be  suppressed,  in  cities  certainly. 
And  if  it  cannot  be  suppressed,  I  should  think  that  the  legislature  ought  by 
some  proper  means  to  regulate  and  control  it. 

Q.  You  lay  down  the  broad  principle,  then,  than  an  evil  which  cannot  be 
suppressed  ought  to  be  controlled  and  regulated, — a  broad  principle,  covering 
all  kinds  of  evils  and  crimes  ? 


APPENDIX.  379 

A.    If  it  cannot  be  suppressed,  I  will  lay  that  down  as  a  principle. 
Q.    Many  evils  do  exist  to  a  great  degree,  and  are  very  great  evils. 
A.    I  do  not  think  that  a  great  evil  can  be  suppressed  entirely ;  but  if  it 
gets  to  be  as  large  as  this  evil,  I  think  it  ought  to  be  controlled. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HENRY  A.  MARSH. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     You  live  in  Amherst  ? 

A.     I  do,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  lived  in  that  neighborhood  ? 

A.     Since  1859. 

Q.  Are  you  familiar  with  the  moral  condition  of  that  region  of  which 
Amherst  may  be  called  the  centre  ? 

A.  I  think  I  am  ;  my  business  has  brought  me  in  contact  with  the  people 
of  that  region  a  great  deal. 

Q.     What  is  your  business  ? 

A .     Publisher  and  editor  of  a  newspaper. 

Q.  In  respect  to  abstinence  from  intoxicating  liquor  and  freedom  from 
drunkenness,  how  does  the  present  state  of  your  community  compare  with 
what  it  was  a  dozen  years  ago  ? 

A.  As  I  did  not  live  in  that  community  a  dozen  years  ago  I  could  not 
compare  it. 

Q.     Then  state  positively  without  undertaking  to  state  it  relatively. 

A.  As  a  general  thing  I  think  the  community  are  temperate  men ;  not 
total  abstainers.  It  is  generally  considered  that  the  prohibitory  law  is  enforced 
in  that  place.  Notwithstanding,  liquor  can  be  obtained  by  any  parties  who 
want  it,  who  have  the  money  .to  buy  it.  The  town  has  appointed  town  agents 
for  three  or  four  successive  years,  and  the  town  has  annually  instructed  to 
prosecute  all  infringements  on  the  prohibitory  law.  I  think  that  the  select- 
men have  honestly  attempted  to  enforce  it.  They  have  instituted  prosecu- 
tions wherever  they  could  obtain  evidence  ;  but  it  has  been  almost  impossible 
to  get  persons  to  swear  that  they  have  had  liquor  at  any  place.  They  have 
no  hesitation  in  saying  that  they  think  that  liquor  is  used,  but  the  persons  who 
obtain  the  liquor  will  not  disclose  where  it  is  obtained.  There  are  a  great 
many  places  where  liquor  is  sold  in  private  houses.  Liquor  is  obtained  by 
express.  It  comes  there  in '  packages  from  the  city.  I  believe  there  is  no 
difficulty  in  getting  it  from  the  city.  I  believe  there  is  no  difficulty  in  persons 
ordering  liquors  through  the  express. 

Q.  Did  you  state  how  many  places  there  were  in  Amherst  where  liquor 
could  be  bought  ? 

A.  There  are  in  that  place  some  five  or  six  saloons  where  beer  and  cider 
are  sold,  but  I  think  no  intoxicating  liquors.  I  do  not  think  travellers  would 
find  any  difficulty  in  obtaining  liquors  at  the  hotels,  though  the  citizens  do 
not  get  it  there.  They  purchase  it  at  the  town  agency.  All  that  a  person 
has  to  do  is  to  say  that  he  wants  it  for  sickness,  and  I  believe  that  the  agent 
has  no  power  to  deny  him.  It  has  been  told  me  by  persons  who  know,  that 
there  are  some  thirty  places  where  liquor  is  sold  in  Irish  families  and  other 
families  ;  and  there  are  instances  where  people  form  clubs,  and  have  generally 
a  deposit,  and  go  there  and  get  their  liquor  as  they  like,  but  these  are  not 


380  APPENDIX. 

private  houses.  There  have  been  some  arrests,  but  it  has  been  very  difficult 
to  convict.  I  do  not  know  of  but  one  conviction  that  has  been  obtained  there 
in  some  time,  and  that  was  by  means  of  a  person  who  had  disclosed  where  he 
had  purchased  liquor. 

Q.  You  have  alluded  to  the  fact  that  persons  buy  at  the  town  agency. 
Have  you  looked  into  that  to  see  how  the  sale  of  rum  and  whiskey  stands 
relatively  in  the  quantity  of  sale  and  the  probable  use  of  those  articles  for 
medicinal  purposes  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  I  have.  Knowing  how  extensively  it  was  sold  at  the  town 
agency,  I  had  the  curiosity  to  examine  the  records  and  returns  made  to  the 
State  agent  from  that  place  and  other  places,  and  I  found  the  amount  was  so 
much  that  I  went  carefully  through  it  and  made  an  abstract.  I  have  here  an 
abstract  from  some  towns  in  every  county  in  the  State. 

Q.     Is  the  law  enforced  in  all  these  towns  ? 

A.  In  most  of  the  towns  it  is  enforced.  In  the  towns  where  the  sale  is 
open  and  public  there  are  very  small  returns,  and,  in  some  cases,  none  at  all. 
In  some  instances,  in  this  abstract,  it  will  be  found  that  the  average  amounts 
to  three  and  one-half  gallons  to  every  family  in  the  town.  This  liquor  consists 
of  Medford  rum,  whiskey,  Holland  gin,  &c. 

TESTIMONY  OF  MINOT   TIRELL,  JR. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  You  are  a  practising  lawyer  in  the  town  of 
Lynn? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  the  present  consumption  of  intoxicating 
liquors  in  Lynn,  from  your  observation  either  %s  a  citizen  or  in  connection 
with  your  practice  at  the  bar  ? 

A.  From  my  observation  as  a  citizen,  I  should  say  there  appeared  to  be 
no  decrease  in  intoxication,  liquor  being  within  the  reach,  so  far  as  I  judge,  of 
those  who  desire  it,  not  by  reason  of  any  open  places  being  kept — for,  so  far 
as  my  observation  extends,  there  are  no  open  places — but  instead  of  that  there 
have  been  several  clubs  formed  in  the  neighborhood  of  my  office.  I  took  the 
trouble  of  inquiring  this  morning  of  parties  whom  I  know,  and  I  was  informed 
that  there  were  as  many  as  six  clubs  existing  within  a  radius  of  twenty  rods 
of  what  js  termed  the  Central  Square,  which  is  near  the  centre  of  the  town 
and  the  principal  business  portion  of  the  town.  The  existence  of  these  clubs 
are  such  that  the  members  of  the  clubs  have  an  opportunity  to  go  there  and 
take  different  liquors  in  whatever  quantity  they  may  desire  ;  and,  as  I  suppose, 
they  purchase  liquors,  it  is  merely  a  purchase  of  liquors  on  their  part,  with  a 
division  among  themselves.  I  have  known  of  a  case,  within,  I  think,  some 
two  years,  where  parties  were  prosecuted  for  furnishing  liquor  to  their  cus- 
tomers. They  had  an  extensive  patronage  among  the  business  portion  of  the 
community,  and  their  patrons  or  customers  were  anxious  to  obtain  their 
liquors,  and  there  was  an  arrangement  made  to  supply  them.  I  would  say 
here,  that  our  business  is  such  that  we  bring  the  trade  to  our  doors.  Southern 
merchants  coming  here  visit  Lynn,  and  it  is  customary  among  those  who  have 
travelled  great  distances  to  take  liquor,  where  otherwise  they  would  not  when 
at  home  ;  and  it  was  frequently  the  case  that  they  could  not  purchase  a  glass 


APPENDIX.  381 

of  liquor  conveniently,  and  there  was  some  attempt  made  in  the  way  of 
making  provision  for  those  persons  .who  came  to  our  city  as  customers.  So  far 
as  the  sale  of  liquor  is  concerned,  I  do  not  think  that  there  are  at  the  present 
time  any  places  of  open  sale ;  but,  so  far  as  obtaining  liquor  is  concerned,  it 
appears  that  it  is  within  the  reach  of  every  one  who  desires  it. 

Q.  Do  you  observe  anything  in  the  increased  sobriety  of  the  people  which 
would  indicate  any  lack  of  opportunity  ? 

A.  I  do  not.  I  might  volunteer  to  say  that  there  was  more  than  at  the 
time  I  spoke  of.  I  regarded  the  case  at  that  time  to  be  that  there  was  an 
apparent  disposition  on  the  part  of  the  authorities  to  allow  the  sale. 

Q.     At  the  present  time  it  is  stopped  so  far  as  the  open  sale  is  concerned  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  so  far  as  I  have  heard  or  seen. 

Q.     And  yet  there  is  no  increase  of  sobriety  ? 

A.  To  all  appearances  there  is  none.  There  appears  to  be  a  complaint 
of  drunkenness,  more  or  less,  caused  by  the  drunkenness  which  we  see  in  the 
streets. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Is  it  not  the  custom  of  some  of  the  shoe  dealers 
to  furnish  liquor  to  those  of  their  customers  who  desire  it  ? 

A.    I  could  not  say,  sir;  not  having  been  in  the  business  myself. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DAVID  HOYT. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     You  are  a  citizen  of  Deerfield  ? 

A.  That  is  my  native  place.  I  have  been  off  and  on  for  .the  last  twenty 
years. 

Q.  Will  you  state,  in  your  own  way,  what  advantages  or  disadvantages 
your  observation  and  experience  have  suggested  to  you  as  flowing  from  the 
prohibitory  legislation  of  the  State  ? 

A.  I  have  been  a  pretty  considerable  observer  of  the  morals  of  our  people. 
We  claim  to  be  a  good  moral  people  there,  but  we  have  exceptions,  as  all  other 
places,  I  suppose,  have  ;  but  I  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  present 
law  is  decidedly  a  failure.  Those  that  have  drank  heretofore  to  excess,  con- 
tinue to  do  so  hitherto  and  do  at  this  time.  I  came  accidentally  across  one  of 
them,  a  man  whom  I  would "  not  let  have  a  glass  of  liquor  ;  a  man  whom  I 
have  known  for  years,  and  I  said  to  him :  "  What  are  you  going  to  do  when 
they  put  this  law  in  force  ?  "  —  knowing  that  he  would  have  it  if  it  was  to  be 
be  had.  "  Our  constables  are  here,"  said  I,  "  and  have  seized  everything  in 
the  county."  "  I  do  not  care  anything  about  it,"  was  his  reply.  "  Why,  you 
cannot  live  without  it  ?"  said  I.  "  I  do  not  live  without  it,"  he  said,  "  I  have 
all  I  want."  "  Well,"  said  I,  "  where  can  it  be  procured  ?  "  "  Well,"  said  he, 
"  we  have  got  a  very  liberal  town  agent ;  I  get  all  I  want  there."  "  Well," 
said  I,  "is  it  a  good  article?"  "We  cannot  do  any  better  at  present,"  he 
said.  In  addition  to  that,  so  far  as  my  knowledge  extends,  we  have  a  class  of 
people  there  who  manage  to  got  it  some  way.  We  are  not  an  intemperate 
people,  I  am  happy  to  say,  and  we  are  an  industrious  and  moral  people  as  a 
general  thing.  But,  like  all  other  places,  we  have  some  that  are  bad  ;  and 
there  is  no  law,  either  Maine  law  or  any  other  law  up  to  date,  that  will  touch 
'  them  at  all,  for  some  way  or  other,  I  do  not  know  how  they  do  it — there 
appears  to  be  a  combination — they  seem  to  have  (I  do  not  know  but  I  shall 


382  APPENDIX. 

hit  some  one,)  a  sort  of  freemasonry  by  which  they  all  understand  each  other, 
and  stand  by  each  other,  and  supply  themselves  with  what  they  want ;  and 
what  has  been  done  by  your  State  Constables  has  only  put  it  a  little  out  of 
reach.  The  places  where  they  get  it  I  know  not ;  but  I  have  known  of  one 
package  coming  from  New  York.  I  do  not  know  where  it  is  got.  This  class 
of  people  do  not  seem  to  care  whether  we  have  an  agent  or  not,  and  those 
who  do  not  use  it  have  very  little  feeling  in  the  matter.  We  are  an  agricul- 
tural people,  and  if  there  is  any  class  of  people  who,  through  the  heat  of  sum- 
mer and  the  cold  of  winter,  are  most  likely  to  need  something  in  the  way  of 
stimulating  drink,  it  is  this  class*  of  people.  But  I  am  happy  to  say,  that  we 
have  but  few  in  our  community  who  do  use  it ;  and  so  far  as  it  is  used,  and  so 
far  as  intemperance  exists  among  our  people,  this  law  does  not  reach  it ;  far 
from  it.  For  myself,  I  am  for  a  stringent  license  law,  a  judicious  law.  I  am 
in  favor  of  putting  such  duty  as  you  please,  upon  a  man  who  sells  it,  and 
that  lie  shall  be  put  under  strict  regulation  and  control  in  the  sales,  so  that  he 
may  take  care  of  those  who  are  in  the  habit  of  using  liquor  to  any  extent- 
I  never  have  had  any  confidence  in  this  law.  It  does  not  touch  us  at  all.  We 
have  two  faithful,  and  I  do  not  know  but  honest,  temperate  State  Constables  ? 
and  we  occasionally  see  an  account  in  the  Greenfield  paper  of  their  great 
doings.  We  hear  that  they  have  been  to  Easthampton  and  got  shot  at,  but 
that  the  constable  took  out  his  pistol  and  scared  away  whoever  had  shot  at 
him. 

Q.  Do  you  regard  the  present  system  of  law  as  any  substantial  protection 
to  the  temperate  people  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  not  in  the  least.  For  the  men  that  we  have  who  are  intern, 
perate  have  all  they  want,  and  do  not  care  anything  about  the  present  law. 
They  are  not  dependant  on  the  means  of  getting  it  in  our  town.  Vermont  is 
but  a  short  distance  from  us  and  Connecticut  is  close  by,  and  Springfield  is 
close  by,  where  the  thing  can  be  obtained. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  say  that  the  people  who  are  addicted  to 
drinking  in  your  region  do  not  have  any  difficulty  in  obtaining  liquor 
although  they  have  got  a  good  agent  ? 

A.     That  was  only  one  individual  case  that  I  spoke  of. 

Q.     But  how  is  the  license  law  going  1;o  help  the  matter  in  any  other  ? 

A.  Well,  sir;  so  far  as  that  is  concerned,  we  have  a  hotel  in  our  place, 
but  the  man  who  keeps  it  has  not  got  a  very  great  amount  of  custom.  It  is 
with  difficulty  that  the  man  can  live.  I  would  license  that  landlord,  and  I 
would  put  such  a  duty  upon  him  that  he  should  break  up  all  others  in  the 
business  and  I  think  he  would  be  as  good  a  police  as  you  could  get. 

Q.    You  would  license  him  and  it  would  be  a  respectable  place  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;  it  would  be  a  respectable  place. 

Q.  Is  the  sale  any  more  innocent  in  a  respectable  place,  than  it  is  any- 
where else  ? 

A.  I  would  have  it  so  that  the  moment  he  violated  the  privilege  his  license 
should  be  taken  away  from  him ;  that  would  be  my  way,  sir. 

Q.  Can  you  tell  me  the  habits  of  the  people  of  your  community  as  long 
ago  as  1827? 


APPENDIX.  383 

A.  Very  much  the  same  as  they  are  now.  We  are  called  stereotyped 
towns. 

Q.     Is  liquor  as  common  as  it  was  forty  years  ago  ? 

A.  From  forty  to  sixty  years  ago  most  everybody  drank  in  those  towns, 
moderately. 

Q.     Did  they  not  drink  it  daily  and  esteem  the  article  a  necessity  ? 

A.  I  can  remember  when  our  merchant  kept  it  for  sale  the  same  as  he  did 
tea  and  coffee. 

Q.     Were  you  in  a  store  forty  years  ago  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     But  the  storekeepers  kept  it,  did  they  not  ? 

A.  I  should  think  they  did  even  a  great  deal  longer  ago  than  that.  I 
cannot  give  you  the  time,  but  I  can  recollect  those  days.  I  should  think  it 
was  as  much  as  fifty  years  ago. 

Q.  Was  it  not  the  custom  at  that  time  for  storekeepers  to  bring  up  hogs- 
heads of  rum  from  Boston  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  they  would  bring  it  up  from  Hartford. 

Q.     Were  there  any  distilleries  in  town  ? 

A.    There  used  to  be  one  where  they  distilled  cider-brandy. 

Q.  Did  you  not  use  to  have  a  good  many  drunkards  ?  Do  you  not  think 
there  was  four  times  as  much  liquor  drank  then  as  there  is  now  ? 

A.    I  should  not  think  so. 

Q.     Was  there  not  four  times  as  much  per  head  then  as  now  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  but  that  there  was.  I  know  that  if  they  drank  it  they 
went  off  steadier. 

Q.    Did  they  not  drink  four  times  as  much  per  head  as  they  do  now  ? 

A.    I  could  not  say  as  to  that. 

Q.     Did  they  not  drink  three  times  as  much  per  head  as  they  do  now  ? 

A.    WelJ,  I  will  split  the  difference  with  you  and  call  it  twice  as  much. 

Q.     They  had  a  license  law  then  did  they  not  ? 

A.    In  those  days  I  believe  they  had  licenses. 

Q.     Stringent  ? 

A.    I  think  not. 

Adjourned. 


384  APPENDIX. 


ELEVENTH    DAY— EVENING. 

FRIDAY,  March  8, 1867. 
The  Committee  resumed  the  hearing  of  testimony  at  7  o'clock,  P.  M. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DR.  EDWARD  H.  CLARKE. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)    How  long  have  you  been  a  Doctor  of  Medicine  ? 

A.     About  twenty  years. 

Q.     Did  you  study  in  this  country  solely  ? 

A.     I  studied  in  this  country  and  in  Europe. 

Q.     Where  in  Europe  did  you  study  ? 

A.    In  Paris,  in  Berlin,  and  in  Vienna. 

Q.     You  are  a  practitioner  of  medicine  in  this  city  ? 

A.     I  am. 

Q.  Do  you  hold  any  office  in  the; Medical  Department  of  Harvard  Col- 
lege? 

A.    I  am  the  Professor  of  Materia  Medico. 

Q.  How  much  time  have  you  spent  abroad  since  you  have  been  a  man 
and  while  you  were  in  pursuit  of  your  studies  ? 

A .     Between  five  and  six  years. 

Q.     Have  you  ever  resided  in  a  vine-growing  country  ? 

A.     1  have. 

Q.  Have  you  taken  any  pains  to  observe  the  effect,  the  moral  and  physical 
effect,  produced  by  the  employment  of  wine  in  vine-growing  countries  as  a 
part  of  the  alimentation  of  the  people  ? 

A.  I  never  had  my  attention  particularly  directed  to  that  while  living 
there,  any  more  than  any  person  residing  there  would  be  likely  to  have  his 
attention  called  to  it.  I  lived  at  one  time  for  about  three  years  in  an  almost 
exclusively  vine-growing  country,  and  I  looked  upon  the  light  wine  there 
produced  as  being  an  addition  to  the  comfort  and  sustenance  of  the  people. 

Q.  What  was  the  apparent  effect,  if  any,  produced  by  the  use  of  wines 
upon  the  sobriety  of  the  people  ? 

A.  I  could  only  answer  from  observing  in  a  very  general  way,  as  any 
traveller  would  do,  that  I  saw  but  very  little  drunkenness. 

Q.  You  have  had  occasion,  have  you  not,  both  as  a  practising  physician, 
and  also  as  a  lecturer  and  professor  of  Materia  Medico,  to  consider  the 
relation  which  alcoholic  stimulants  bear  to  the  human  system  ? 

A.  I  have  been  obliged  to  do  so  in  order  to  discuss  the  matter  at  the 
College  ? 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  what  is  the  relation  which  alcoholic 
stimulants  bear  to  the  human  economy,  whether  dietetically  or  medicinally  ; 
and  if  there  is  any  class  of  them  which  may  be  considered  materially  different 
from  any  other  class  ?  Make  the  discrimination  in  your  own  way,  and  also 
discriminate,  in  your  own  way,  between  their  dietetical  and  medicinal  uses. 


APPENDIX.  385 

A.  The  question  is  so  general,  that  it  would  be  almost  impossible  to  give 
anything  but  a  general  answer.  In  the  first  place,  the  different  alcoholic  bev- 
erages differ  so  much  from  each  other,  that  it  would  be  impossible  to  classify 
them  under  one  head.  They  vary  not  only  in  the  amount  of  alcohol  they 
contain,  but  in  other  ingredients,  some  of  which  are  even  more  important  than 
the  alcohol ;  so  that  to  describe  the  medicinal  or  dietetical  value  of  alcoholic 
beverages,  as  a  class,  I  think  would  be  impossible,  except  in  a  very  general 
way  to  say  that  they  exert  a  certain  general  action. 

Q.  Are,  or  are  not,  alcoholic  stimulants  administered  by  the  profession, 
medicinally  ? 

A.    They  are. 

Q.    For  what  purpose,  generally  ? 

A.  To  answer  that  question,  I  should  have  to  take  each  liquor  by  itself; 
they  are  characteristically  different.  There  are  certain  ones  of  them  that  are 
classified  together,  under  the  name  of  ardent  spirits,  such  as  brandies,  whis- 
keys, etc.,  and  they  are  materially  different  from  the  wines,  and  the  three  are 
materially  different  from  beer  and  ale. 

Q.  Are  the  different  species  of  ardent  spirits  materially  different  in  their 
action  from  each  other  ? 

A.  In  some  respects  they  are,  and  in  other  respects  they  are  not.  So  far 
as  you  use  anything  that  is  pure  alcohol,  or  alcohol  diluted  with  water,  the 
action  would  be  the  same. 

Q.  There  is  a  substantial  difference,  for  instance,  between  the  action  of 
brandy  and  the  action  of  St.  Croix  rum  ? 

A.  I  should  want  to  see  the  articles  and  know  what  they  were  made  from, 
to  answer. 

Q.    Is  there  any  dietetic  use  of  any  of  the  alcoholic  drinks  ? 

A.     There  is. 

Q.     Will  you  describe  or  define  it  ? 

A.  Perhaps  the  most  general  statement  that  I  could  make  that  would 
cover  the  ground  of  your  inquiry,  would  be  something  like  this.  Stating  in 
the  first  place,  in  addition  to  the  difference  that  I  have  mentioned,  that 
alcoholic  beverages  vary  very  much  with  regard  to  each  other,  that  they  also 
vary  in  their  action  with  regard  to  the  individual  taking  them,  and  are  also 
varied  in  their  action  by  the  condition  of  the  individual  at  the  time,  varying 
precisely  as  many  articles  of  food,  as  many  articles  of  drink,  as  many 
medicines  do;  so  that  allowing  for  these  differences,  which  may  change 
the  result  very  materially,  we  find  that  alcoholic  beverages  or  drinks,  to  a 
greater  or  less  extent,  when  applied  locally,  irritate  the  part  with  which  they 
come  in  contact,  that  irritation  very  soon  passing  away  (depending  upon  the 
strength  of  the  solution),  and  leaving  the  part  as  healthy  as  it  was  before.  If 
it  is  continued  in  contact  long  enough  it  may  produce  a  disease  there.  When 
taken  internally  they  stimulate  more  or  less  the  different  functions  of  the 
system,  depending  upon  the  amount  taken,  upon  the  character  of  the  indi- 
vidual, and  upon  the  character  of  the  liquid.  That  stimulation  may  last  for 
a  short  time,  and  then  pass  entirely  away  with  no  ill  effects,  or  it  may  be 
continued  long  enough  to  produce  dangerous  effects  upon  the  system.  When 
taken  into  the  system  they  may,  and  they  do  in  certain  stages  of  their  prog- 
49 


386  APPENDIX. 

ress,  arrest  the  disintegration  of  the  tissue  which  is  going  on.  That  arrest  is 
oftentimes  productive  of  good ;  it  may  go  on  far  enough  to  be  productive  of 
evil.  Thus  you  have  a  constantly  varying  action,  which  may  do  good  or 
which  may  do  harm,  which  will  do  good  in  gome  cases  and  which  will  do  harm 
in  others,  depending  entirely  upon  the  dose,  the  condition  of  the  individual, 
the  character  of  the  liquid  and  the  way  it  is  taken. 

•  Q.  Then  if  I  understand  you  correctly,  you  cannot  affirm  of  a  small  dose, 
that  it  will  produce  an  effect  characteristically  like  that  produced  by  a  larger 
dose,  only  in  a  less  degree  ? 

A.  Not  at  all.  The  effects  may  be  and  often  are  characteristically 
different. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  .wine,  as  used  by  the  inhabitants  of  some  parts 
of  Europe  with  their  meals  and  as  a  part  of  their  daily  food,  does,  when  thus 
taken  and  in  that  combination,  produce  the  effect  of  food  ? 

A.  That  question  could  be  answered  only  by  knowing  the  condition  of 
the  individual  thus  using  the  wines.  They  may  and  often  do  act  the  part  of 
food  in  the  system,  or  they  may  not  act  the  part  of  food,  depending  upon  the 
circumstances  of  the  case.  They  replace  food  under  certain  circumstances. 

Q.  You  have  read,  I  suppose,  of  Cornaro,  the  Italian  nobleman,  who  lived 
for  over  fifty  years,  upon  twelve  ounces  of  bread  and  fourteen  ounces  of  wine, 
per  day.  In  that  case,  did  the  wine  sustain  alimentation  ? 

A.  Undoubtedly  it  did;  and  since  then,  other  experiments  have  demon- 
strated, that  without  a  sufficient  amount  of  food,  the  system  may  be  sustained 
longer  if  wines  are  taken,  than  if  they  are  not  taken. 

Q.  The  distilled  liquors  are  often  Described  by  the  medical  profession, 
are  they  not  ? 

A .     They  are. 

Q.  And  different  descriptions  of  distilled  liquors  are  prescribed  to  different 
patients,  according  to  the  circumstances  ? 

A.  They  are,  just  as  other  drugs  are  administered;  the  doses  varying  as 
much.  It  is  my  habit  to  instruct  the  class  coming  before  me,  to  vary  the  char- 
acter of  the  alcoholic  liquid,  and  the  dose  that  is  given,  in  accordance  with 
the  condition  of  the  patient,  with  as  nice  a  discrimination  as  they  are  capable 
of  making. 

Q.  Then  I  understand  you,  that  under  given  or  proper  circumstances, 
alcoholic  drinks,  or  some  one  of  them,  may  be  classified  with  food,  for  all 
practical  purposes  ? 

A.  They  may  produce  the  effect  of  food  in-  the  system,  under  certain 
circumstances. 

Q.  You  recognize,  then,  if  I  understand  you,  that  there  is  both  a 
scientific  and  a  practical  difference  between  a  stimulant  dose  and  a  narcotic 
dose  ? 

A.  We  do.  There  is  both  a  double  and  a  treble  action  of  many  liquids, 
and  alcohol  is  no  exception  ;  in  certain  doses  it  produces  an  effect  which  is 
characteristically  different  from  the  effect  produced  by  any  other  dose. 

Q.     Is  that  not  also  true  of  other  narcotics,  like  tea  and  coffee  ? 

A.     It  is  ;  and  also  of  tobacco,  opium  and  Indian  hemp. 


APPENDIX.  387 

Q.  Do  you  find,  in  scientific  research,  any  general  tendency,  throughout 
history  and  throughout  the  different  regions  of  the  globe,  where  mankind 
have  been  distributed,  to  the  use  of  narcotic  stimulants  ? 

A.  I  think  there  is.  There  is  a  class  of  agents  which  tend  to  check  or  to 
retard  the  disintegration  of  tissue.  In  the  process  of  life,  there  is  going  on 
all  the  time,  a  construction,  or  a  building  up  of  the  system,  and  a  destruction 
or  a  wearing  away,-  which  is  continued  every  moment  of  life ;  and  certain 
agents  tend  to  retard  one  or  the  other  of  these  processes,  or  to  increase  one 
or  the  other.  We  find,  all  through  the  world,  tea,  tobacco,  fermented  liquors, 
or  alcoholic  beverages,  distributed  wherever  the  human  race  are  to  be  found, 
and  they  seem  to  afford  the  opportunity  of  checking  a  too  rapid  destruction 
of  the  tissues,  just  as  other  means  are  employed  to  increase  the  construction, 
and  so  keep  the  balance  right  and  the  individual  in  health.  Alcoholic  bev- 
erages, including  all  under  that  name,  come  in  that  general  class. 

Q.  Can  you  or  can  you  not,  in  all  cases,  substitute  what  is  properly  called 
food,  and  thus  get  along  without  these  stimulants  ? 

A.  You  cannot;  the  process  sometimes  will  not  go  on  without  something 
to  aid  it ;  or  it  will  go  on  imperfectly,  if  at  all. 

Q.  In  the  work  of  alimentation,  then,  nature  has  to  provide,  both  for  the 
construction  of  tissue,  and  also,  under  certain  circumstances,  prevent  the  too 
rapid  destruction  of  the  tissues  ? 

A.  Undoubtedly;  and  means  are  to  be  found  by  which  those  processes 
can  be  modified  in  either  direction. 

Q.  Is  it  suggested  by  any  of  the  physiologists,  that  to  arrest  the  destruction 
of  tissues  is  to  interfere  with  the  order  of  nature  ? 

A.  I  never  met  with  such  a  statement.  The  destruction  must  necessarily 
go  on,  and  to  arrest  the  normal  cause  would  be  to  interfere  with  it.  I  do  not 
remember  having  met  with  the  statemeut  you  have  mentioned. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  describe  the  sort  of  cases  in  which  it  is 
desirable  or  useful  to  arrest  the  destruction  of  tissue  by  these  means  or  by 
similar  means,  other  than  cases  of  positive  disease,  like  that  of  typhoid  fever, 
in  which  they  give  whiskey,  or  tubercular  diseases  in  which  they  also  admin- 
ister it. 

A.  There  are  very  few  persons  in  the  community  in  perfect  health,  probably 
not  one  of  whom  you  could  say  with  absolute  certainty  that  every  part  of  his  body 
was  in  a  state  of  perfect  health,  but  for  average  individuals,  who  are  in  average 
health,  you  will  find  that  with  some,  the  digestion  is  imperfect ;  the  food  can- 
not be  converted  into  bone  and  flesh  and  brain,  because  there  is  an  insuffi- 
cient power  in  the  machinery  to  work  it  up  into  that  material ;  there  are 
certain  conditions  of  that  sort,  where  the  addition  of  some  kind  of  stimulant — 
which  might  in  one  case  be  one  kind,  and  in  another,  another  kind — will 
enable  that  process  to  go  on  very  perfectly,  perhaps  as  perfectly  as  it  does  in 
the  average  of  cases.  Under  those  circumstances,  a  person  may  be  about  his 
ordinary  work,  seemingly  very  well,  and  yet  requiring  as  an  aid  to  his  diges- 
tion, some  agent  which  will  enable  the  process  of  alimentation  to  go  on,  and 
it  will  go  on  much  better  with  it  than  without  it.  Or,  a  person  may  be 
troubled  with  some  sort  of  disease  by  which  he  is  wasting  away  more  rapidly 


388  APPENDIX. 

than  the  system  ought  to  waste,  so  that  the  building  up  of  the  system  is  not 
equal  to  the  destruction  of  it,  and  such  a  person  becomes  emaciated  and  yet 
is  in  a  condition  of  fair  and  average  health  ;  but  such  wasting  away  will  tell 
upon  him  sooner  or  later.  Under  such  circumstances,  the  use,  as  a  part  of 
food,  of  some  agent  like  that  we  have  described,  will  arrest  the  destruction, 
aid  the  process  by  which  the  system  is  built  up,  and  in  this  way  contribute  to 
promote  the  health.  There  are  a  great  number  of  cases  of  that  kind,  where 
the  dietetic  use  of  alcoholic  liquor  is  so  important,  that  I  have  deemed  it 
necessary  for  years  past,  to  give  a  lecture  to  the  class  upon  the  proper  dietetic 
uses  of  this  class  of  agents,  pointing  out  the  conditions  when  they  are  to  be 
used,  and  the  conditions  when  they  are  to  be  avoided.  For  it  is  always  to  be 
borne  in  mind,  that  with  alcohol,  as  with  all  other  agents  of  that  class,  the  use 
of  it  in  improper  doses,  at  improper  times,  will  carry  the  condition  over  to 
some  sort  of  disease  or  malady,  just  as  much  as  on  the  other  hand,  it  will  be 
favorable  to  health  and  tend  to  prolong  life. 

Q.  Are  there  any  cases,  that  will  permit  persons  who  are  properly  regarded 
as  in  health,  and  who  are  pursuing  their  regular  avocations  for  year  after 
year,  and  making  up  a  good  average  life  by  the  aid  of  that  sort  of  alimenta- 
tion, who  otherwise  would  sink  beneath  the  burdens  and  cares  of  daily  duty 
and  existence  ? 

A.  1  meant  to  include  what  I  suppose  you  refer  to,  under  what  I  have  just 
stated. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  In  saying  that  each  liquor  produces  its  own 
peculiar  effect,  and  the  same  liquor  different  effects  in  different  quantities, 
you  indicate  the  necessity  of  great  skill  in  administering  it  ? 

A.     Undoubtedly. 

Q.  Would  you  think  it  at  all  proper,  with  a  view  to  the  uses  which  you 
have  been  illustrating,  that  each  individual  should  be  his  own  judge  ? 

A.  Just  as  much  so  as  in  the  taking  of  tobacco,  or  of  opium,  or  of  Indian 
hemp,  or  of  tea,  or  of  coffee, — or  nearly  as  much  in  taking  tea  and  coffee  ; 
perhaps  I  should  not  say  quite. 

Q.  Would  you  think,  that  omitting  tea  and  coffee,  that  in  any  of  those  cases 
the  general  mass  of  the  people  are  competent  to  prescribe  for  themselves  ? 

A.     Whether  they  are  or  not,  we  cannot  help  it ;  they  will  do  it. 

Q.    But  still  your  professional  opinion  would  be  of  service  in  this  matter  ? 

A.  My  opinion  would  be,  that  after  carefully  explaining  the  principles  to 
an  individual  I  should  say  to  him,  that  knowing  these  things,  he  must  judge 
for  himself,  just  as  he  has  occasion  to  do  in  many  other  cases.  I  point  out  the 
principle,  and  then  say  to  the  individual,  "  Knowing  this,  you  must  now  gov- 
ern yourself  by  what  I  have  told  you." 

Q.  Would  pointing  out  the  principle  to  him,  involve  a  discussion  with  him 
of  the  nature  of  the  liquids  prescribed,  and  the  conditions  of  the  system  requir- 
ing them  ? 

A.  It  would  depend  entirely  upon  his  intelligence,  who  he  was,  and  what 
I  considered  it  necessary  for  him  to  know  about  it. 

Q.  You  would  expect  him  to  understand  much  more  than  you  have 
indicated  V 


APPENDIX.  389 

A.  Not  more  than  I  would  in  prescribing  cod-liver  oil  to  a  person,  when 
I  would  explain  to  him  when  it  would  be  well  to  take  it,  and  when  to  leave  it 
off. 

Q.  In  that  case  you  direct  his  use  of  the  oil.  I  refer  to  the  popular  admin- 
istration of  alcholic  remedies. 

A.    When  people  were  sick,  I  should  not. 

Q.  Then  when  it  comes  to  the  use  of  alcoholic  properties  as  medicinal 
agents,  you  would  not  ? 

A.  When  patients  are  sick  enough  to  require  the  daily  attendance  of 
a  physician,  I  should  administer  alcohol  with  the  same  care  as  the  food,  or  the 
beef  tea  which  the  person  is  to  take. 

Q.  Are  not  the  cases  you  have  described  as  cases  requiring  alcoholic  treat- 
ment, cases  requiring  exceeding  discretion  ? 

A.     Not  more  than  the  other  cases  that  I  have  mentioned. 

Q.     But  are  they  not  cases  requiring  exceeding  discretion  ? 

A .  They  are  cases  that  depend  entirely  upon  the  health  of  the  individual. 
I  have,  for  instance,  sent  a  person  to  go  around  the  world,  not  expecting  to 
see  him  again  within  a  year,  and  directed  him  to  take  a  certain  quantity  of  an 
alcoholic  preparation  every  day  of  his  absence. 

Q.     The  same  in  the  hot  climates  as  in  the  colder  ? 

A.  The  quantity  would  vary  with  the  disease,  and  the  condition  of  the 
person. 

A.  As  a  general  rule,  what  is  the  effect  of  alcoholic  preparations  in  the  hot 
climates,  as  compared  with  their  effect  of  the  same  preparation  in  the  cold 
climates  ? 

A .  Before  that  can  be  answered,  you  must  state  the  condition  of  the  indi- 
vidual, and  the  kind  of  beverage  that  is  taken. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  pretty  general  rule  upon  the  subject,  although  the  details 
of  application  may  vary  ? 

A .     I  should  think  not. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  alcoholic  medicines  produce  an  entirely 
different  effect,  or  opposite  results  upon  a  given  condition,  upon  one  person 
from  what  they  do  on  another  person,  in  hot  climates  ? 

A.  It  would  be  impossible  to  answer  that  question  definitely,  without  a 
more  precise  statement  of  the  conditions,  although  I  have  lived  for  three  years 
in  a  tropical  climate ;  the  conditions  vary  so  much  under  different  circum- 
stances. 

Q'  Let  me  suppose  a  class  of  conditions.  One  individual  has  an  insufficient 
quantity  of  food,  from  whatever  circumstances  you  may  please  ;  I  understand 
you  to  say  that  medicinal  administrations  are  advantageous  in  arresting  the 
disintegration  of  the  tissue ;  what  would  be  the  effect  of  alcohol  administered 
under  such  circumstances  ? 

A.  Dr.  Hammond  made  an  experiment  touching  that  point,  and  found 
that  he  increased  in  weight  while  doing  it. 

Q. '  Would  he  not,  however,  decrease  in  health  ? 

A.  If  a  person  was  in  a  perfectly  sound  state  of  health,  he  would  ;  if  he 
was  in  that  condition  in  which  the  disintegration  was  going  on  more  rapidly 
than  he  could  bear,  then  it  would  be  favorable  to  health.  If  the  disintegra- 


390  APPENDIX. 

tion  was  not  going  on  any  more  rapidly  than  he  could  bear,  and  enough  was 
given  to  produce  an  arrest  of  the  metamorphosis,  it  might  have  an  unfavorable 
effect.  This  effect  is  not  produced  in  all  cases,  as  you  can  take  it  in  doses 
which  would  not  produce  it. 

Q.  I  understand  you  then  to  say,  that  if  a  man  is  in  perfect  health  and 
his  digestive  and  secretive  organs  so  act  as  to  preserve  his  strength  and  weight 
and  general  health  and  condition,  the  introduction,  in  that  case,  of  alcoholic 
or  medicinal  agents,  would  be  deleterious  ? 

A.  Not  precisely.  I  have  no  doubt  that  a  person  in  perfect  health  (if 
you  can  conceive  of  such  an  individual),  could  have  a  dose  of  alcoholic  beve- 
rage given  him,  of  a  certain  kind  and  in  a  certain  way,  so  as  not  to  impair  his 
health  in  the  slightest  degree,  and  I  can  conceive  of  it  taken  in  such  a  way  as 
to  injure  it. 

Q.  Allow  me  to  ask,  as  a  more  practical  question,  whether  the  ordinary 
doses  used  in  dram-drinking,  in  a  case  of  general  good  health,  can  be  expected 
to  be  otherwise  than  injurious  ? 

A.     Of  what  liquid  ? 

Q.     Any  of  the  common,  stronger  drinks. 

A.  I  should  want  to  know,  before  answering,  just  what  you  mean  by  a 
"  dram  dose."  If  it  were  four  ounces,  I  think  it  would  ;  if  it  were  half  an 
ounce,  it  could  be  managed  so  as  not  to  injure. 

Q.  You  made  an  exception  upon  the  ground  that  few  persons  are  in  per- 
fect health ;  is  it  not  your  judgment  that  nine  persons  are  in  bad  health  from 
the  use  of  alcohol  when  it  is  not  needed  to  arrest  the  disintegration  of  the 
tissues,  where  one  person  is  ill  from  the  want  of  alcohol  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  as  I  have  ever  heard  that  question  raised,  nor  do  I  see 
how  it  could  be  got  at,  to  prove  it.  At  best,  it  would  be  but  a  mere  matter 
of  surmise. 

Q.  Is  that  question  any  more  difficult  than  those  that  you  have  been 
answering  in  the  direct  examination  ? 

A.    It  is,  materially. 

Q.  We  are  supposing  the  condition  of  a  large  class  of  persons  in  ill- 
health,  whom  the  physicians  visit.  Do  you  not  frequently  find  persons  in  a 
diseased  condition,  induced  by  the  unnecessary  use  of  alcoholic  beverages? 

A .  Undoubtedly,  but  I  should  say,  so  far  as  my  personal  experience  goes* 
not  a  great  deal  oftener  in  this  city  than  I  do  from  the  taking  of  opium. 

Q.  That,  I  suppose,  is  not  intended  as  a  compliment  to  opium,  but  as  a 
recommendation  of  whiskey.  You  spoke  of  alcohol  when  taken  into  the 
system,  irritating  the  part  it  comes  in  contact  with.  Does  it  not  always  do 
that  ?  Is  it  not  an  irritant  and  a  disturber  of  the  human  system,  in  and 
of  itself? 

A.  Locally  brought  in  contact,  it  irritates  for  a  short  time  ;  that  irritation 
then  passes  off  and  leaves  the  part  just  as  it  was  before.  If  you  increase  the 
quantity  or  continue  it  longer,  it  may  produce  disease. 

Q.  Which  is  the  more  hurtful,  occasional  inebriety,  with  considerable 
intervals,  or  daily  dram-drinking  ? 

A.  Like  all  questions  of  that  character,  it  is  impossible  to  answer  it,  with- 
out more  definitely  fixing  the  dose.  I  have  seen  persons,  from  daily  dram- 


APPENDIX.  391 

drinking,  become  thoroughly  diseased,  using  that  expression  in  its  ordinary- 
sense.  I  have  seen  persons  from  occasional  inebriety,  in  the  same  condition. 
If  a  person  is  taking  spirits  so  frequently  during  the  day  that  he  does  not 
allow  time  for  its  passing  out  of  the  system,  he  will  undoubtedly  experience 
an  injurious  effect.  The  point  I  wished  to  make  was,  that  those  questions 
could  only  be  answered  definitely,  by  definitely  determining  when  it  was  taken 
and  in  what  quantity.  An  inquiry  concerning  the  effect  of  general,  or  of 
frequent  dram-drinking  is  so  general,  that  it  will  only  admit  of  a  general 
answer. 

Q.  That  is  to  say,  the  effect  depends  upon  the  number  of  drams  per  day? 
and  the  size  of  the  drams  ? 

A .     Certainly. 

Q.  But  as  it  is  generally  practised, — one  or  two  glasses  regularly  per  day 
of  ordinarily  strong  liquor  ? 

A.     And  how  much  in  the  glass  ? 

Q.  I  am  not  in  the  habit  of  taking  those  drams ;  I  suppose  that  you  can 
judge  as  well  as  I  what  passes  for  a  glass  of  liquor ;  suppose,  for  example, 
that  a  tumbler  half  full  of  whiskey  was  regularly  taken  once  or  twice  per  day, 
what  would  be  the  effect  ? 

A.    I  should  say  that  the  practice  would  be  dangerous  if  continued. 

Q.  You  are  probably  somewhat  acquainted  with  the  drinking  habits  of  the 
community  about  us.  The  point  I  want  to  ascertain  is,  whether  the  usual, 
habitual  drinking  is  or  is  not  more  injurious  to  the  health  than  occasional 
inebriety,  with  intervals  of  a  month  or  more  between  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  there  is  very  much  choice  between  the  two  practices. 
They  are  both  injurious. 

Q.  In  relation  to  the  influence  of  alcohol  in  a  dietetic  point  of  view,  I  do 
not  understand  you  as  saying  that  alcohol  serves  any  other  purpose  than 
the  arrest  of  the  disintegration  of  tissue  ? 

A.    Yes,  it  does. 

Q.    In  the  way  of  alimentary  results  ? 

A.  It  aids  in  the  constructive  work  of  the  system,  and  consequently  enables 
more  food  to  pass  into  the  system. 

Q.  Does  alcohol  itself  ever  assimilate  to  any  portion  of  the  human 
system  ? 

A.     That  is  a  question  that  is  unsettled  at  present. 

Q.    What  is  the  general  belief  upon  that  subject  ? 

A.  The  best  physiologists  say  that  it  is  an  undecided  question;  that 
experiments  have  not  yet  determined  it. 

Q.    Has  it  not  been  thought  to  be  experimentally  proven  ? 

A.    It  has  been. 

Q.    By  what  method  of  proof? 

A.  It  has  passed  into  the  system,  but  nil  of  its  reactions  in  the  system  have 
not  been  detected.  Consequently  we  do  not  know  what  has  become  of  it. 

Q.  How  was  the  former  position  supposed  to  be  proved ; — that  it  did  not 
enter  into  combination  with  the  system  ? 

A.  That  was  supposed  to  be  proven  because  it  was  thought  to  be  shown 
that  all  the  alcohol  that  had  passed  into  the  system  had  passed  out  of  it. 


392  APPENDIX. 

Q.    How  was  that  experiment  made  ? 

A.  In  various  ways ;  one  by  testing  for  alcohol  in  the  various  secretions. 
At  one  time  some  French  chemists  thought  they  had  proved  that  the  whole 
of  the  alcohol  taken  into  the  system  had  passed  out,  and  so  stated. 

Q.    Did  they  state  that  they  had  detected  an  equal  weight  ? 

A .  They  supposed  they  had  proved  that  the  whole  of  the  alcohol  had 
passed  out.  They  detected  a  certain  amount  that  had  passed  out. 

Q.     How  did  that  amount  compare  with  the  amount  taken  ? 

A.    It  was  less  than  five  per  cent. 

Q.     Can  you  refer  me  to  any  work  that  sets  that  forth  ? 

A.  Doctors  Lallemand,  Perrin,  and  Duroy  made  the  experiments.  Experi- 
ments have  since  been  made  in  Boston  to  show  the  same. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  Lallemand  detected  less  than  five  per  cent, 
of  the  alcohol  taken  ? 

A.     They  professed  to  have  detected  the  whole. 

Q.     What  amount  did  they  account  for  ? 

A .  They  accounted  for  less  than  five  per  cent,  as  passing  out  of  the  sys- 
tem. That  which  remained  in  the  system  they  did  not  account  for.  They 
supposed  that  they  had  proved  the  whole,  and  that  was  their  error. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  they  did  not  actually  detect  five  per  cent,  as 
passing  from  the  system  in  the  breath,  in  evaporations  from  the  surface, 
and  in  the  various  secretions  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.     Was  that  the  extent  of  their  claim. 

A.    Not  the  extent  of  their  claim,  but  what  has  since  been  proven. 

Q.  My  question  is  not  what  other  experiments  have  or  have  not  estab- 
lished, but  what  proportion  in  weight  of  alcohol  did  they  claim  to  have 
detected  ? 

A-    They  claimed  to  have  detected  the  whole. 

Q.     The  entire  amount  ? 

A.     If  I  understand  your  question,  they  did. 

Q.  My  own  impression  was  that  they  claimed  to  have  detected  very  nearly 
an  equal  amount,  leaving  a  slight  quantity  lodged,  as  they  claimed,  among  the 
tissues. 

A .     Their  error  has  since  been  pointed  out. 

Q.    Will  you  show  it  ? 

A.  They  never  have  shown  by  their  experiments  (which  have  since  been 
repeated  in  Boston  and  in  London),  that  they  got  more  than  five  per  cent  of 
the  total  amount  digested,  under  any  circumstances. 

Q.  You  would  not  claim,  then,  that  the  alcohol  is  transformed  into  any 
portion  of  the  solids  or  fluids  of  the  body  ? 

A.     That  is  a  matter  at  present  unknown. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  nutrition  which  is  derived  from  some  of  the  alcoholic 
preparations,  I  suppose  you  refer  to  the  lighter  preparations,  and  not  to  the 
stronger  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  the  alcohol  in  any  way  essential  to  the  nutrition  contained  in  such 
preparations  ? 


APPENDIX.  393 

A.  I  do  not  see  how  you  could  get  rid  of  it.  You  could  not  have  the 
liquid  without  the  alcohol ;  it  is  essential  to  the  character  of  the  liquid. 

Q.  Is  it  demonstrable  that  the  nutriment  of  these  preparations  cannot 
be  administered  in  any  other  form  ? 

A.     I  know  nothing  that  will  take  the  place  of  them. 

Q.    You  speak  of  diseases  now,  do  you  not .? 

A.  Of  disease  in  a  general  way.  I  speak  of  people  who  are  well  enough 
to  be  about  their  ordinary  business,  and  are  called  well. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  would  be  the  result  upon  the  general  health  of  the 
people,  if  the  whole  community  should  determine  no  longer  to  take  their 
aliment  in  the  form  of  alcoholic  preparations,  bnt  in  some  other  way  ? 

A.  I  think  that  they  would  seek  some  other  sort  of  excitement.  I  can 
answer  that  question  better  by  an  illustration.  At  the  close  of  one  of  my 
lectures  upon  opium,  one  of  the  class,  who  was  formerly  a  druggist,  from  an 
interior  town  in  the  western  part  of  Massachusetts,  came  into  my  room  and 
said  that  he  believed  that  in  the  town  in  which  he  lived  the  prohibitory  liquor 
law  was  perfectly  enforced.  The  town  was  so  situated  (being  remote  from  a 
railroad)  that  there  was  no  opportunity  for  dissipation,  and  but  little  opportu- 
nity for  obtaining  liquor.  As  far  as  he  knew,  that  law  was  enforced.  He  stated 
that  he  had  been  a  druggist  in  that  town  for  many  years  ;  that  previous  to  the 
enforcement  of  the  prohibitory  law  he  sold  opium  only  upon  the  direction  of 
a  physician ;  since  then  he  had  sold  for  the  last  two  or  three  years  an  average 
of  one  grain  per  day  of  opium,  to  every  man,  woman  and  child  in  that  town. 
The  people  had  sought  another  means  of  excitement,  another  stimulant. 

Q.  That  leaves  my  question  unanswered.  I  do  not  ask  what  would  be  the 
effect  if  one  stimulant  was  omitted  and  another  taken  up.  We  have  been 
considering  the  effect  of  alcoholic  preparations  in  an  average  state  of  health, 
which  is  a  diseased  state  of  health.  My  question  is,  suppose  that  form  of  ali- 
mentation was  removed  and  no  other  substituted,  what  would  be  the  effect  of 
that  removal  upon  the  general  health  ? 

A .  I  think  that  is  supposing  an  impossible  case.  I  think,  if  you  were  to 
take  away  all  the  stimulants  referred  to,  alcohol,  opium,  tobacco,  tea,  coffee, 
cocoa,  and  the  entire  range  of  dietetic  stimulants  of  that  sort,  that  the  effect 
would  be  injurious. 

Q.  Suppose  that  all  but  tea,  coffee,  and  cocoa  were  omitted.  There  are  a 
few  men  and  a  few  women  in  this  community  that  use  tea  and  coffee  or  cold 
water,  but  no  liquors  whatever,  nor  opium,  Indian  hemp,  or  tobacco.  Do  you 
suppose  those  persons  enjoy  less  health,  upon  an  average,  than  those  who 
habitually  use  alcoholic  preparations  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  there  would  be  any  material  difference  between 
them.  I  do  not,  of  course,  refer  to  the  excessive  use  of  alcoholic  stimulants. 
Suppose  one  class  of  persons  to  take  a  glass  of  sherry  wine  or  a  glass  of  hock, 
two  or  three  ounces  at  a  time,  not  more,  and  the  other  class  to  use  tea  and 
coffee,  as  you  suppose,  I  do  not  think  there  would  be  any  difference  between 
the  two  classes  ;  one  would  be  in  as  good  health  as  the  other. 

Q.    But  are  you  not,  in  your  case,  supposing  a  condition  that  requires  a 
slight  arrest  of  the  disintegration  of  the  tissue  ? 
50 


394  APPENDIX. 

A.  No,  I  mean  such  persons  as  you  speak  of.  Suppose,  if  you  -wish,  a 
community  of  one  hundred  thousand  in  perfect  health,  living  without  it,  and 
another  community  of  one  hundred  thousand  living  with  it ;  the  first  taking 
one  glass  (about  two  ounces) ,  of  wine  per  day ;  the  second  abstaining  from 
wine.  I  do  not  think  that  there  would  be  any  difference  in  the  health  of 
the  two  communities. 

Q.     Do  you  speak  of  hock,  or  the  lighter  wines  ? 

A.     I  refer  to  the  simplest  of  the  lighter  wines. 

Q.  Would  you  make  the  same  remark  touching  other  articles  sold  as  wine 
in  this  country  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  what  they  are,  so  that  I  could  not  answer. 

Q.     Have  we,  strictly  speaking,  any  of  the  lighter  wines  in  this  country  ? 

A.    I  suppose  that  we  have,  but  a  very  few  of  them. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  speak  of  the  simplest  qualities  of  the  lighter 
wines  ? 

A.     We  have  some  of  that  quality,  but  not  a  great  many. 

Q.     Do  you  refer  to  such  wines  without  any  addition  of  alcohol  ? 

A.  I  presume  that  we  have  some  of  that  class  of  light  wines  without  any 
addition  of  alcohol,  but  I  have  very  little  knowledge  upon  the  subject.  I 
lived  for  a  long  time  in  the  family  of  a  large  wine-grower,  and  was  told  by 
him  that  he  was  not  in  the  habit  of  enforcing  his  wines  with  alcohol,  and  I 
think  that  he  was  a  man  upon  whose  word  I  could  depend.  He  stated  that 
the  wine  that  he  sent  to  this  country  or  to  England  underwent  no  change  but 
the  ordinary  fermentation. 

Q.  Summing  up  then,  you  would  say,  that  between  the  small  amount  of 
alcoholic  preparations  of  the  lighter  kind  which  you  say  is  not  incompatible 
with  good  health,  and  the  current,  drinking  usages  of  society,  there  is  a  very 
wide  gulf? 

A.  I  should  say  there  is.  There  is  a  tendency,  however,  with  all  persons 
taking  stimulants,  to  increase  that  stimulant.  I  observe  that  all  appetites 
tend  to  their  own  gratification,  and  I  should  place  the  appetite  for  stimulants 
under  the  same  general  law,  as  the  other  appetites. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  ordinary  appetite  for  food  is  open  to  precisely 
the  same  danger  as  the  appetite  for  manufactured  drinks  of  the  kind  of  which 
we  are  speaking  ? 

A.  To  not  precisely  the  same  danger,  it  is  different,  but  still  it  is  open  to 
considerable  danger.  I  think  one  of  the  greatest  dangers  of  any  in  this  com- 
munity, so  far  as  my  observation  goes,  lies  in  the  use  of  opium. 

Q.  Do  you  conceive  that  in  the  testimony  you  have  given,  that  there  is 
anything  that  should  encourage  the  present  drinking  usages  of  the  community 
about  us  ? 

A.  It  is  difficult  to  answer  so  general  a  question,  but  without  wishing  to 
split  hairs  at  all,  I  answer,  that  in  one  sense,  I  look  upon  the  drinking  usages 
of  society  as  very  injurious. 

Q.     In  what  sense  ? 

A.  Drinking  to  excess.  The  answer  will  perhaps  be  more  in  the  spirit  of 
your  question,  if  I  say,  that  so  far  as  I  can  watch  the  community  that  I  am 
called  to  visit  professionally,  so  far  as  I  can  observe,  I  look  upon  the  usage 


APPENDIX.  395 

of  drinking  as  one  that  must  be  governed  by  the  intelligence,  by  the  character, 
by  the  force  of  will  (if  you  choose  to  put  that  in),  of  the  individual,  and 
that  it  can  be  regulated  in  no  other  way. 

Q.  Granting  that,  is  it  not  desirable  by  every  consideration  that  may  be 
drawn  from  science,  from  good  morals,  from  the  good  order  of  society,  from 
the  influence  of  the  law,  from  personal  example,  to  restrain  and  diminish  the 
use  of  liquors  as  a  beverage,  with  a  view  of  going  back  to  a  normal,  healthy 
condition  of  appetite  and  body  ? 

A.  There  again,  comes  up  the  question  of  what  would  be  a  legal  and 
proper  way  of  restraining.  I  have  no  sort  of  question  that  every  appetite 
should  be  kept  in  a  proper  limit  and  restraint,  and  that  every  person  (includ- 
ing those  who  use  alcoholic  beverages),  in  every  way,  should  be  taught  to 
restrain  his  appetites  within  proper  limits,  and  that  neglect  of  that  opens  the 
way  to  danger. 

Q,  But  are  the  present  usages  of  the  community  within  what  you,  as  a 
physician,  and  a  man  of  science,  would  consider  proper  limits  ? 

A.  Putting  the  question  in  that  way,  I  should  undoubtedly  agree  with 
you,  that  they  are  not. 

Q.  It  seems  to  be  apparent  that  the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages,  develops 
the  appetite  by  a  law  limitless,  demanding  an  increased  quantity,  but  does 
'that  same  law  apply  to  food,  demanding  an  increased  quantity  of  that  ? 

A.  Not  altogether.  But  I  do  not  think  that  alcohol  is  an  exception  to 
other  articles  of  the  same  class  of  stimulants  ;  the  appetite  grows  with  all  of 
them. 

Q.     We  are  comparing  stimulants  with  food. 

A.  That  alcohol,  or  alcoholic  beverages,  or  fermented  liquors,  are  as 
necessary  to  the  community  as  bread  and  milk  and  meat,  I  suppose  that  no 
one  will  maintain. 

Q.  And  no  one  would  assert  that  they  were  as  harmless,  or  as  safe  to  be 
used,  or  as  free  from  danger  ? 

A.    I  suppose  not. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DR.  JAMES  C.  WHITE. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDEEW.)     Are  you  a  practitioner  of  medicine  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     In  this  city  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    For  how  long  have  you  been  ? 

A.     For  three  years. 

Q.     Are  you  also  a  professor  in  a  Medical  College  ? 

A.  I  am  one  of  the  professors  of  chemistry  in  the  Medical  School  of 
Harvard  University. 

Q.  I  will  ask  you  then,  alluding  to  one  of  the  inquiries  put  to  Dr.  Clarke — 
whether  you  as  a  chemist  have  had  your  attention  directed  to  the  subject  of 
of  the  investigations  made  by  Lalamand  and  his  associates,  as  to  the  action  of 
alcohol  upon  the  system,  and  especially  in  reference  to  the  question  whether 
or  not  it  was  eliminated  en  totalite  ? 

A.    I  have. 


396  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  the  investigations  which  you  yourself 
have  made  and  the  conclusions  to  which  you  have  arrived,  and  also  state 
what  is  the  present  condition  of  scientific  knowledge  upon  this  subject  ? 

A.  Before  the  experiments  of  Lalamand,  Perrin,  and  Duroy,  which  have 
been  alluded  to,  it  had  been  stated  by  some  observers,  that  the  alcohol  had 
been  wholly  transformed  into  the  economy",  with  the  exception  of  a  small 
amount  which  passed  out  through  the  lungs,  immediately  after  being  taken. 
It  was  transformed,  according  to  some  chemists,  into  one  set  of  substances, 
according  to  others,  into  another  set  of  substances,  and  finally  escaped  as  was 
supposed,  in  the  way  of  carbonic  acid,  by  the  lungs,  &c.  These  French 
chemists  showed  conclusively,  that  that  was  not  the  case ;  that  a  certain 
amount  was  eliminated  in  an  unchanged  condition  ;  that  is,  alcohol  having 
been  taken  into  the  stomach,  a  certain  amount  passes  out  by  the  lungs,  a 
certain  amount  passes  out  by  the  skin,  and  a  certain  amount  by  the  kidneys. 
From  their  experiments,  which  were  very  carefully  performed  (and  which 
have  since  been  corroborated  in  every  particular),  these  chemists  published 
certain  conclusions,  one  of  which  was,  that  alcohol  was  not  a  food,  and  on  two 
reasons  they  based  this  conclusion  :  one  reason  was,  that  the  alcohol  was  not 
transformed,  at  all,  in  the  economy ;  and  the  other  was,  that  it  was  elimi- 
nated entirely.  Their  expression  was  "en  nature  et  en  totalite  \"  that  it  was 
eliminated  in  natural  channels  and  en  totalite.  So  far  as  their  conclusions 
are  that  alcohol  is  eliminated  unchanged,  they  are  correct,  but  their  con- 
clusion that  alcohol  is  eliminated  en  totalite  is  unfounded  upon  any  experiment 
that  they  performed.  Their  published  conclusions,  that  alcohol  is  not  trans- 
formed into  the  system,  are  entirely  of  a  negative  nature.  They  simply 
proved  that  it  was  not  changed  into  two  other  substances ;  further  than  that, 
their  experiments  did  not  go.  So  far  as  the  quantity  goes,  their  experiments 
proved  simply  this :  that,  a  person  taking  a  given  amount  of  alcohol  into  the 
stomach,  a  very  small  amount  was  passed  out  by  the  skin,  a  somewhat  larger 
amount  by  the  lungs,  and  as  they  themselves  stated  in  so  many  words,  the 
remainder  is  principally  secreted  by  the  kidneys.  They  performed  several 
series  of  experiments  to  illustrate  this,  but  so  far  as  the  quantity  goes,  they 
never  succeeded  in  getting  beyond  a  small  percentage  of  the  amount  that  was 
given.  They  proved,  moreover,  that  alcohol  ceased  to  be  eliminated  in  a  cer- 
tain time,  by  the  lungs,  in  the  space  of  eight  hours,  and  by  the  kidneys  in 
twelve  or  fourteen  hours,  and  that  after  that  time,  no  more  escaped  by  either 
of  these  channels.  They  found  by  their  experiments  that  in  giving  a  person 
a  thousand  drachms  of  alcohol,  they  would  get  four  or  five  drachms,  in  the 
first  half  of  that  time.  They  never  performed  any  experiments  covering  the 
whole  amount  of  time  in  which  they  say  the  kidneys  act  in  this  way,  and  they 
also  show  that  from  hour  to  hour,  the  kidneys  secrete  less  and  less.  During 
the  time  that  the  kidneys  were  secreting  the  greatest  quantity,  they  got  but  a 
small  percentage  only.  These  experiments  have  been  repeated  at  a  much 
more  recent  day,  and  by  men  occupying  as  high  a  scientific  rank,  and  the 
result  of  all  the  experiments  is  precisely  the  same.  But  the  conclusions  to 
which  these  other  chemists  have  come  are  quite  different.  That  is,  they  find 
a  small  percentage  of  alcohol  secreted,  but  they  say  that  any  conclusion  as  to 
quantity,  based  upon  that  amount,  is  unfounded;  that  they  cannot  assert, 


APPENDIX.  39T 

from  finding  a  small  amount,  that  all  is  secreted.  And  this  is  the  opinion  of 
all  the  scientific  men,  that  I  know,  at  the  present  day.  Moreover,  experi- 
ments have  been  made  by  other  chemists,  by  taking  tlie  whole  amount  of 
excretions  passing  within  twenty-four  hours,  and  with  very  much  larger,  and 
with  very  much  smaller  amounts  than  these  French  chemists  used.  It  was 
found  by  them,  that  in  the  case  of  a  person  taking  twenty-four  ounces  of 
brandy,  from  time  to  time,  during  twenty-four  hours,  the  amount  of  alcohol 
discharged  by  the  kidneys  (which  is  the  chief  channel,  according  to  these 
chemists),  was  very  small  indeed.  The  amount  of  fluid,  containing  enough 
alcohol  to  burn,  which  they  obtained,  was  a  very  few  drachms.  So  the 
conclusions  of  the  French  chemists  were  certainly  unwarranted.  They  proved 
that  alcohol  was  eliminated,  but  that  only  a  very  small  quantity  was  eliminated. 
As  to  the  other  experiments,  from  which  they  drew  their  conclusion  that 
alcohol  was  not  transformed  at  all  into  the  economy,  it  had  been  stated  by 
another  French  chemist  that  alcohol  was  transformed  into  acetic  acid  or 
vinegar ;  and  they  simply  proved,  in  a  very  few  experiments,  that  acetic  acid 
was  not  to  be  found  in  the  blood,  and  they  inferred,  therefore,  that  alcohol 
had  not  been  transformed  at  all  into  the  economy.  We  know  that  of  the 
alcohol  taken  into  the  blood,  a  very  small  amount  comes  out  from  the  blood 
unchanged  ;  a  very  large  percentage,  therefore,  remains  to  be  accounted  for. 
What  its  changes  are  is  a  matter  entirely  unknown ;  what  becomes  of  it 
remains  unproved. 

Q.  Then  what,  if  anything,  have  you  to  say  in  reference  to  the  final  con- 
clusions of  those  French  chemists,  that  for  the  reasons  they  stated  alcohol  was 
not  to  be  classed  as  a  food  ? 

A.     That  they  offered  no  evidence  whatever. 

Q.    Is  it  not  true  that  alcohols  have  been  classified  among  food  ? 

A.  They  have  been.  It  depends  entirely  upon  how  wide  a  definition  is 
given  to  the  term  food.  There  are  many  substances  taken  with  food  and  are 
necessary  to  life,  that  do  not  go  to  form  the  tissues.  Oxygen  is  far  more 
essential  to  life  than  meat.  Water  is  essential  to  life  in  building  up  the 
tissues,  but  does  not  enter  at  all  into  the  formation  of  the  tissues,  passing  in 
and  passing  out  again  in  the  same  form.  They  are  both  food,  although  not 
transformed  into  the  tissues  of  the  body.  If  such  a  latitude  of  definition  is 
given  to  the  term  food,  alcohol  may  be  considered  in  some  instances  to  be 
food  ;  but  if  the  definition  of  the  term  food  is  to  be  confined  to  meaning  that 
only  those  articles  are  to  be  considered  as  food  which  go  to  build  up  the  tissues, 
then  alcohol  is  not  to  be  classed  as  a  food. 

Q.    Would  such  a  definition  exclude  also  water  from  the  category  of  food  ? 

A.    It  would,  and  many  other  substances. 

Q.  Assuming  it  proved  that  alcohol,  when  taken,  is  eliminated  through  the 
kidneys,  is  it'not  also  true  of  other  substances  which  are  universally  classed 
in  the  category  of  food,  such  as  sugar,  salt,  etc.  ? 

A.  There  are  some  substances  of  which  the  tissues  always  contain  a  certain 
amount,  although  they  are  not  chemically  combined,  and  for  the  want  of 
which  we  would  suffer.  If  you  put  a  certain  amount  of  salt  into  the  system 
it  remains  there  ;  if  you  go  beyond  that  point  the  kidneys  excrete  it  at  once, 
and  pass  it  out  entirely,  every  part  of  it.  Sugar,  if  taken  in  a  certain 


398  APPENDIX. 

amount,  will  be  disposed  of  in  other  ways.  If  you  give  more  than  a  certain 
amount  within  a  certain  time,  the  kidneys  excrete  it  in  the  form  of  sugar, 
unchanged ;  so  that  the  fact  that  some  substances  are  eliminated  by  the 
kidneys  in  an  unchanged  condition,  in  no  way  proves  that  those  substances 
are  not  food,  nor  that  they  are  not  beneficial. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  find  water  to  be  essential  to  the  animal 
economy,  although  not  assimilated  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  prepared  to  affirm  the  same  of  alcohol  in  any  form,  that  it  is 
essential  ? 

A.    Not  in  health. 

Q.     What  is  the  most  important  office  of  water  in  the  human  economy  ? 

A.  It  is  difficult  to  state.  Like  many  questions  in  physiological  chemistry 
(a  science  as  yet  in  its  infancy),  it  is  impossible  to  give  a  definite  answer. 
There  are  a  great  many  theories. 

Q.     "Will  you  indicate  what  is  commonly  accepted  as  touching  that  fluid  ? 

A.  It  preserves  the  fluids  of  the  body  in  a  proper  state  of  solution,  and 
acts  as  a  solvent  to  many  organic  substances. 

Q.  Are  there  any  facts  known  to  chemists  which  wpuld  tend  to  show  that 
alcohol  has  any  such  useful  office  in  the  human  economy  while  in  a  state  of 
health? 

A.     No,  sir ;  it  remains  with  the  blood,  the  same  way  that  all  fluids  do. 

Q.     That  is,  temporarily ;  but  finally,  you  cannot  say  ? 

A.    I  cannot  say  what  finally  becomes  of  it. 

Q.  Is  any  chemical  experiment  necessary  to  establish  the  fact  of  elimination 
in  some  measure  ? 

A.     That  is  accepted  as  universally  known. 

Q.     Does  not  every  man's  breath  prove  that  ? 

A.     Of  course ;  that  has  always  been  known. 

Q.  Whatever  darkness  lies  around  the  problem  of  elimination,  as  you  pre- 
sent it,  is  there  anything  in  it  establishing  a  presumption  in  favor  of  tho 
habitual  use  of  alcoholic  preparations,  by  persons,  in  iealth  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  In  respect  to  that  particular  proposition,  do  you 
agree  or  disagree  with  the  ground  taken  by  Dr.  Clarke  ? 

A.    I  agree  with  him  in  every  particular. 

Q.  There  is  a  theory,  is  there  not,  among  physiologists,  which  reckons 
alcoholics  as  in  the  category  of  foods  ? 

A.  In  the  acceptance  of  the  term  food,  which  I  mentioned,  that  is,  that 
there  is  evidence,  from  their  physiological  action,  that  under  some  circum- 
stances, they  act  as  food,  in  the  same  way,  for  instance,  that  beef  tea  does; 
their  effects  are  precisely  the  same  as  food,  judging  by  their  effedts  alone. 

Q.  But  for  a  person  in  natural  health,  it  is  more  proper  to  resort  to  those 
articles  which  are  known  as  the  true  food  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  In  those  cases  in  -which  you  say  that  alcoholic  prep- 
arations act  precisely  in  the  same  way  as  beef  tea,  is  it  the  alcoholic  or  the 
nutritive  elements  of  the  preparation  that  thus  act  ? 


APPENDIX.        XiVK|{s 

-4.    It  is  the  alcohol  alone.  fi  A  .  T    r  .  ^ 

Q.    Will  you  state  that  point  once  more  ?  >  It  \  |    \ 

-4.  I  say  that,  under  some  circumstances,  alcohol  acts  in  precisely  the  same 
way,  and  its  results  are  entirely  the  same  as  the  results  of  Ipoef  tea.  It  acts 
directly  and  finally  in  the  same  way  as  beef  tea. 

Q.  Do  you  affirm,  then,  anything  different  from  that  affirmed  by  Dr. 
Clarke,  which  is  that  it  arrests  the  disintegration  of  the  tissue  ? 

A.    Without  attempting  to  explain  it,  I  speak  of  the  result,  alone. 

Q.    Does  beef  tea  arrest  the  disintegration  of  tissue  ? 

A.  It  would  if  it  acted  as  a  stimulant,  in  the  same  way  as  alcohol.  Beef 
tea  is  food,  inasmuch  as  it  contains  nutrition,  which  is  an  integral  portion 
of  the  tissues.  Alcohol  does  not  contain  nutrition,  but  under  certain  circum- 
stances, alcohol  seems  to  act  in  the  same  way  as  beef  tea,  both  directly  and 
eventually.  That  is  to  say,  the  strength  is  supported,  and  the  weight  ceases 
to  be  diminished.  Beef  tea  would  also  tend  somewhat  to  restrict,  in  the 
same  way. 

Q.    What  is  the  normal  action  of  beef  tea,  stimulant  or  restrictive  ? 

A.  Under  these  circumstances  it  is  a  stimulant,  wholly.  Its  action  is  too 
quick  to  be  restrictive. 

Q.    You  speak  of  diseased  cases,  strictly  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  saying  that  you  know  nothing  to  create  a  presumption  that  alcohol 
is  assimilated  into  the  human  system,  do  you  not  separate  it  from  such  a  com- 
modity as  beef  tea  ? 

A'.     I  do  not  understand  your  question. 

Q.  In  the  absence  of  all  evidence  that  alcohol  in  any  case  is  assimilating.. 
is  not  alcohol  thereby  separated  from  any  other  food  like  beef  tea  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  in  that  sense. 

Q.  Is  or  is  not  the  theory  stated  by  you,  in  answer  to  a  question  in  the 
direct  examination,  as  to  the  theory  of -alcohol  being  food,  generally  accepted 
by  physiologists  ? 

A.  I  think  that  it  is.  Liebig  had  a  theory  that  alcohol  was  used  to  support 
respiration. 

Q.    What  is  your  opinion  of  that  theory  of  Liebig  ? 

A .     That  it  is  undemonstrated. 

Q.  Is  there  any  evidence  to  show  that,  in  case  of  health,  the  human  system 
has  any  less  resisting  power  to  heat  and  cold  without,  than  with  the  use 
of  alcohol  ? 

A.  It  has  been  stated  that  persons  who  drank  alcohol  in  cold  climates,  are 
not  as  well  able  to  resist  extreme  cold  a^  those  who  do  not  drink. 

Q.     Do  you  remember  Dr.  Carpenter's  theory  upon  that  point  ? 

A.  I  remember  his  doctrine,  but  I  do  not  think  that  he  made  any 
experiments. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  AVERT.)  Do  you  in  your  practice  prescribe  wines  and 
alcoholic  liquors  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  thus  prescribing  wine  or  liquor  to  be  used  by  a  patient,  would  you 
direct  that  person  to  the  town  or  State  agency  to  obtain  the  article  ? 


400  APPENDIX. 

A.    I  would  not. 

Q.     Have  you  any  particular  reason  for  not  thus  directing  him  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  have  any  particular  reason.  I  have  no  experi- 
mental reason. 

Q.  Is  it  generally  understood  by  your  profession  that  the  liquors  obtained 
at  the  State  agencies,  are  superior  to  those  obtained  elsewhere  ? 

A.  My  impression  is  that  they  are  not  so  good ;  but  I  cannot  speak 
professionally. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DR.  E.  H.  CLARKE  (continued.) 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  confine  yourself  to  the  scientific  part  of  the 
question  in  what  you  have  said,  do  you  ? 

A.    I  endeavored  to. 

Q.  I  want  to  ask  you  a  question.  You  observe  the  evils  of  the  excessive 
use'  of  these  articles.  Do  you  not  think  that,  if  all  distilled  spirits  were  out 
of  existence,  considering  merely  the  physical  effects  of  their  use,  the  world 
would  be  the  gainer  ? 

Q.  (By  Dr.  CLARKE.)  By  distilled  spirits,  do  you  mean  to  limit  yourself 
to  brandies  ? 

A.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  I  mean  brandies,  whiskey,  and  rum,  and  that 
class  of  spirits,  but  not  including  wines  and  ales. 

A.  (By  Dr.  CLARKE.)  Yes,  sir;  I  think  it  would  be.  Not  but  that  an 
evil  would  be  done,  because  there  are  diseases  and  various  cases  where  these 
spirits  are  of  advantage ;  but  on  the  average  (I  suppose  you  refer  to  drinking 
in  all  classes  and  in  every  way),  I  think,  limiting  it  to  that  class  and  leaving 
the  others,  that  would  be  my  impression.  It  would  be  merely  a  general 
impression. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Would  you,  on  the  whole,  stop  even  there  ?  Let 
us  suppose  ourselves  shut  off  by  a  sharp  exigency,  not  having  what  we  do 
need  sometimes.  Would  the  world  be  worse  off? 

A.     I  am  not  so  certain  as  to  that. 

Q.  I  should  like  to  ask  whether,  in  your  estimation,  the  Lord,  in  making 
the  world,  made  alcohol  in  any  way  ? 

A.     I  think  he  did. 

Q.    Where  do  you  ever  find  it  in  a  natural  state  ? 

A.  If  a  natural  man  is  what  a  man  is  to  grow  to,  and  alcohol  is  the  out- 
growth of  what  has  been,  I  do  not  suppose  that  the  Lord  has  yet  made  a 
perfect  man. 

Q.  Can  you  attribute  the  making  of  alcohol  to  the  Lord  in  the  way  that 
you  would  the  making  of  a  reaping-machine  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  not  in  the  same  way.     I  think  he  made  them  both. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  In  other  words,  in  the  light  of  a  larger  philos- 
ophy, since  that  is  the  view  to  which  you  have. been  invited,  is  not  the  use  of 
this  among  the  seductive  agents  and  instrumentalities  through  which  and 
through  the  management  of  which,  the  race  has  got  to  pass  to  its  ultimate 
development  and  purification  ? 


APPFNDIX.  401 

A.  When  you  get  to  moral  and  metaphysical  questions,  I  feel  hardly  pre- 
pared to  give  much  of  an  opinion.  I  suppose  the  human  race  were  intended 
to  work  their  way  through  the  difficulties  which  surround  them. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  I  would  ask  whether  the  world  has  not  had  suffi- 
cient experience  in  that  article,  and  if  it  had  not  better  stop  its  use  as  quick 
as  convenient  ? 

A.  I  think  that  when  they  reach  that  state  they  will  wisely  use  it,  and  will 
use  it  only  for  the  proper  purposes. 

TESTIMONY  OF  OLIVER  WENDELL  HOLMES,  M.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     What  is  the  name  of  your  professorship  ? 

A .    Parknian  professorship  of  anatomy  and  physiology. 

Q.  What  are  the  views,  if  any,  to  which  you  have  arrived  in  reference  to 
the  proper  place  of  alcohol  in  its  relations  to  the  human  economy  ? 

A.  I  think  that  alcohol,  sir,  is  meant  for  use  in  the  arts,  for  burning  in 
lamps,  and  for  various  other  similar  purposes.  Alcohol  itself,  I  do  not  think, 
is  an  article  which  is  used  in  the  human  economy.  I  have  never  known  it  to 
be  drank  unless  some  person  may  have  been  unfortunate  enough  to  have 
drank  it  from  the  jars  containing  specimens  in  anatomical  museums. 

Q.  That  question  lays  the  foundation  for  the  one  next  in  order,  which  is 
this  :  have  alcoholic  drinks,  or  drinks  into  which  alcohol  enters  as  a  constitu- 
ent in  combination,  any  proper  use  in  the  human  economy,  dietetically  or 
medicinally  ? 

A.     I  think  they  have,  both  dietetically  and  medicinally. 

Q.    In  what  way  do  they  act  dietetically  ? 

A .     They  act  as  food  —  these  combinations. 

Q.     And  also  as  medicine  ? 

A.     Of  course. 

TESTIMONY  OF  J.  B.  S.  JACKSON,  M.  D. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  what  is  your 
professorship  ? 

A.    Morbid  anatomy. 

Q.  Have  you  had  occasion  in  your  duties  as  a  professor,  and  also  in  your 
practice  as  a  medical  man,  to  consider  the  relation  which  alcohol,  or  any  prep- 
aration into  which  it  enters,  bears  to  the  human  economy,  whether  used 
dietetically  or  medicinally  ? 

A.  I  have,  sir,  been  struck  with  some  observations  bearing  upon  this 
point. 

Q.    Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  what  they  are  ? 

A.  I  have  met  with  diseases,  not  unfrequently  occurring  in  persons  who 
had  used  liquor  to  an  inordinate  extent,  which  I  suppose  I  had  reason  to  think 
was  owing  to  such  use.  And  I  was  struck  with  the  fact  at  the  time  that  I 
made  the  examinations  to  which  I  refer,  that  a  very  important  class  of  diseases 
seemed  to  be  rather  unfrequent  in  those  who  had  been  addicted  to  the  use  of 
their  liquors.  That  observation  I  made  perhaps  twenty  or  twenty -five  years 
ago,  and  I  believe  it  was  then  for  the  first  time  made.  And  it  has  been  con- 
firmed in  different  cases  since,  quite  a  number  of  times.  And  in  fact,  I 
51 


402  APPENDIX. 

received  communications  from  different  individuals  subsequently  in  regard  to 
it,  saying  that  the  observations  which  I  had  made  they  had  also  made. 

Q.     That  they  acted  rather  to  prevent  this  class  of  diseases  ? 

A.     That  they  acted  to  prevent  rather  than  otherwise. 

Q.     What  diseases  do  you  refer  to  ?     And  what  articles  ? 

Q.  I  refer,  speaking  of  the  diseases  that  seemed  to  be  attributable  in  a  few 
cases  to  the  use  of  liquor,  to  certain  diseases  of  the  kidneys  which  have  only 
been  observed  in  modern  times ;'  and  also  to  diseases  of  the  liver.  Both  of 
these  are  common  diseases.  But  I  would  also  say,  that  both  of  these  diseases 
I  have  often  met  with  anatomically  in  persons  perfectly  temperate.  But,  upon 
the  other  hand,  I  refer  to  tubercular  disease,  which  is  so  common  that  it 
is  said  that,  in  the  temperate  regions,  it  destroys  about  one  out  of  every 
five  or  six  in  the  community,  as  it  has  been  observed  in  various  countries. 
This  is  the  result  in  Europe,  and  in  the  observations  which  I  have  made 
I  came  to  the  same  conclusion — one  in  five  and  a  half.  I  had  occasion 
several  weeks  ago  to  refer  to  these  observations  of  my  own,  so  that  I 
can  speak  definitely.  And  in  these  observations  I  noticed  a  fact  which  I  had 
not  thought  of  before.  It  was  not  until  I  had  proceeded  some  way  that  I 
noticed  that  quite  a  number  of  the  grossly  intemperate  subjects  that  I  exam- 
ined had  perfectly  healthy  lungs.  From  that  time  I  went  on  and  examined 
all  the  cases  with  this  point  in  view,  to  ascertain  whether  those  who  had  per- 
fectly healthy  lungs  had  been  temperate ;  and,  in  regard  to  those  whom  I  knew 
to  be  grossly  intemperate,  whether  they  died  of  consumption,  and  whether 
they  showed  that  there  had  been  formerly  tubercular  disease.  And  I  arrived 
at  the  conclusion  that  I  just  now  stated. 

Q.  Is  any  kind  of  distilled  spirit  still  prescribed  by  the  medical  profession 
now  for  the  purpose  of  preventing  lung  diseases,  or  to  retard  their  progress  in 
the  early  stages  ? 

A.  I  presume  it  is  very  well  known  to  the  public — the  intelligent  public — 
as  to  physicians  in  general,  that  in  many  cases  of  threatened  consumption, 
ardent  spirit  is  not  unfrequently  used.  Of  course  the  individual  may,  from 
time  to  time,  be  in  a  condition  in  which  he  may  not  be  able  to  take  it ;  as,  for 
instance,  he  may  be  in  a  plethoric  condition,  and  then  again  he  might  be  able 
to  use  it  for  months  together. 

TESTIMONY  OF  E.  N.  HORSFORD,  M.  D. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     Where  is  your  home  now  ? 

A.  Cambridge. 

Q.  You  are  a  chemist  by  profession  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  pursue  your  studies  during  any  part  of  the  time  abroad  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  in  Germany,  with  Liebig. 

Q.  At  what  time  ? 

A.  Twenty-two  years  ago,  I  went  there. 

Q.  You  were  a  student  with  Liebig  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  long  were  you  a  student  with  him  ? 

A.  Two  years,  I  believe. 


APPENDIX.  403 

Q.     Are  you  familiar  with  his  theory  of  food  ? 

A.    I  believe  I  am,  sir. 

Q.     With  his  division  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    What  were  his  two  general  divisions  of  food  ? 

A.  He  regarded  food  as  being  divisible  into  two  classes, — one  respiratory 
and  the  other  nutritive. 

Q.  What  was  the  principal  element  which  entered  into  that  division  of 
food  which  he  classed  as  nutritive  ? 

A.    Nitrogen  was  one  of  its  prominent  constituents. 

Q.  Had  alcohol,  or  any  combination  into  which  alcohol  enters,  any  place 
in  either  one  of  these  divisions  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  it  would  come  under  the  head  of  what  is  called  respiratory 
food,  which  includes  starch  and  oil  and  those  substances  which,  when  burned, 
keep  the  body  warm. 

Q.  Have  you  any  opinion  whether  any  form  of  alcoholic  drink  does  act  as 
food? 

A.    I  have,  sir. 

Q.    What  is  your  opinion  ? 

A.    I  think  it  is  food. 

Q.    Will  you  explain  ? 

A.  It  ministers- to  the  strength  of  the  organism,  and  it  may  also  enter  into 
the  organism.  It  is  allied  to  fat,  and  substances  which  produce  fat.  And  in 
so  far  as  it  renders  more  perfect  the  digestion  of  food,  meat  and  farinaceous 
food,  it  acts  itself  as-  food.  Its  action  is  to  delay  metamorphosis.  It  acts  in 
that  respect  as  the  aroma  of  tea  and  coffee  does,  and  as  some  of  the  essential 
oils  do.  Perhaps  the  most  recent  experiment  that  has  been  carefully  per- 
formed, is  an  experiment  going  to  show  that  all  this  class  of  bodies  do  actually 
fulfil  the  office  of  food,  and  that  they  do  enable  a  man  to  perform  feats  of 
strength  which  he  could  not  otherwise  do.  These  experiments  have  been 
tried  in  Switzerland.  I  allude  to  Drs.  Wislicenus  and  Fick. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  the  report  of  their  experiments  which  is  in  one  of  the 
recent  numbers  of  the  "  Boston  Medical  and  Surgical  Journal  ?  " 

A.    I  have,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  allude  to  that  now  ? 

A.  I  allude  to  the  original  of  that,  which  I  have  seen  published  abroad. 
The  property  of  alcohol  as  an  antiseptic  and  as  a  stimulant,  when  mingled 
with  food,  and  by  means  of  which  the  digestion  of  food  is  accomplished  more 
healthfully,  is  one  of  the  offices  to  which  I  allude,  when  speaking  of  it  as  food. 
We  know  that  it  has  the  power  of  preserving  the  animal  tissues ;  we  know  it 
is  a  body  which  has  an  affinity  for  oxygen.  We  know  that  it  is  quite  impos- 
sible to  introduce  it  into  the  blood,  which  contains  oxygen,  without  burning ; 
and  if  it  burns  it  must  give  out  heat,  and  in  doing  so,  it  fills  the  same  office  that 
oil  does.  And  in  providing  for  the  slower  digestion  of  food  where,  under- 
other  circumstances,  it  would  be  more  rapidly  digested,  it  is  a  healthful  agent, 
and  may  be  regarded  as  food ;  and  where  it  stimulates  the  digestive  apparatus, 
where  it  would  otherwise  be  retarded,  it  also  acts  as  food,  in  that  it  has  the 
effect  of  producing  more  matter  which  is  assimilable. 


404  APPENDIX. 

Q.    Then  it  is  sometimes  an  antiseptic  and  sometimes  a  stimulant  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  make  an  essential  and  characteristic  difference  between  a 
large  dose  and  a  small  dose  ?  That  is,  does  a  small  dose,  a  mere  stimulating 
dose,  have  an  effect  characteristically  like  a  large  or  narcotic  dose  ?  Or  is 
the  effect  characteristically  different  ? 

A.  There  are  two  stages  of  effect,  one  of  a  stimulant  and  the  other  of  a 
narcotic  character,  both  of  which'have  their  office.  If  you  mean  to  ask  me 
whether,  because  it  is  a  poison  in  its  absolute  purity,  it  is  absolutely  poisonous 
when  in  combination  with  other  substances  ;  because  there  is  acetic  poison  in 
vinegar,  it  does  not  follow  that  we  may  not  therefore  use  vinegar ;  or,  because 
there  is  poison  in  the  oil  of  pepper,  that  therefore  we  cannot  use  pepper. 
The  essential  principle  of  mustard  and  horse  radish  and  a  large  number  of 
condiments  which  in  their  dilution  are  not  poisonous,  act  as  a  poison  upon 
the  human  system,  and  yet  the  condiments  themselves  are  very  commonly 
used,  and  are  found  to  be  beneficial  to  a  certain  extent. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Is  the  regular  progress  of  continuous  disintegration 
of  tissue  as  essential  as  a  condition  of  health  as  the  formation  of  tissue  ? 

A.    If  you  refer  to  the  normal  condition,  it  is  important. 

Q.  When  you  say  that  alcohol  may  arrest  and  preserve  the  tissue,  may 
you  not  say  that  it  might  produce  disease  in  that  way  ? 

A.    I  conceive  not.    It  is  simply  a  preservation  of  the  body. 

Q.    May  not  that  be  carried  too  far  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  any  case  where  the  human  economy  is  stimulated,  by  the  use  of 
alcohol,  however  it  may  be  used,  to  extraordinary  exertion,  is  it,  or  not, 
followed  by  a  relative  prostration  ? 

A.  The  same  as  activity,  under  the  natural  stimulus  of  food,  given  to  a 
certain  extent,  is  proper. 

Q.  If  you  withhold  the  food  and  use  stimulants,  is  not  the  prostration 
greater  than  when  you  use  food  simply,  and  put  forth  an  effort  ? 

A.  I  think  that  depends  upon  circumstances.  You  may  take  food  and 
not  digest  it  for  a  time. 

Q.  If  you  supply  a  certain  amount  of  activity  by  a  stimulant  in  place  of 
food,  does  the  same  condition  remain  as  if  only  food  had  been  used  ?  • 

A.  The  assumption,  I  take  it,  in  the  question  is  that  there  is  perfect  health 
in  the  outset. 

Q.  Take  any  one  of  the  gentlemen  before  us,  will  not  great  exertion, 
under  the  effect  of  alcoholic  stimulants,  be  followed  by  a  prostration  which 
would  not  follow  from  the  same  amount  of  exertion  on  the  basis  of  food  ? 

Q.  (By  Mr.  HOSFOED.)  That  is,  is  it  not  on  the  whole,  if  you  wish  a 
given  amount  of  exertion,  better  to  base  it  on  food  than  on  alcohol  ? 

A.    (By  Mr.  MINER.)    Yes,  sir. 

A.  If  I  could  prescribe  the  conditions,  I  would  say,  yes  ;  but  I  would  say 
it  with  the  limitation  that  you  do  not  have  a  condition  in  which  that  could  be 
infallibly  responded  to. 


APPENDIX.  405 

Q.  Of  course  I  understand  you  to  leave  the  door  open  for  extraordinary 
cases.  But  you  would  not  suggest  that  alcohol  produces  all  the  effect  of 
food  ?  Basing  exertion  upon  it,  you  would  not  leave  the  proposition  there  ? 

A.    I  do  not  quite  get  your  idea. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  a  man  may  labor  a  year  in  carrying  brick  up  a 
forty-foot  ladder,  as  well  upon  the  stimulus  of  alcohol  as  he  would  upon 
bread  ? 

A.  I  have  this  experience,  that  during  my  life  in  Germany,  I  saw  my 
associates  drink  their  light  wines  continuously,  and  I  saw  but  one  drunken 
man  while  I  was  there. 

Q.    Is  alcohol  any  considerable  element  in  these  drinks  in  your  judgment  ? 

A.    My  impression  is  that  they  aid  digestion. 

Q.     Do  you  assume  that  digestion  always  needs  aids  ? 

A.  I  think  there  are  rare  instances  in  which  we  do  not  need  the  assistance 
of  some  such  stimulants  as  tea  or  coffee. 

Q.  Does  tea  produce  all  the  effects  of  alcoholic  stimulants  ?  Is  it  not 
prescribed  within  far  better  limits  ;  that  is,  the  ordinary  consumption  of  it  ? 

A.  I  think  there  might  be  more  said  in  favor  of  it.  You  cannot  get 
intoxicated  with  it  so  well. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  If  the  question  was  asked  you,  whether  God 
made  or  produced  alcohol,  what  should  you  say  ? 

A.  I  should  say  he  did.  Absolute  alcohol  is  something  that  probably 
nobody  in  this  room  ever  saw. 

Q.  You  only  mean  to  say  that  pure  alcohol  is  not  found  except  in  combina- 
tion with  other  substances  ? 

A.  It  is  something  which  is  spontaneously  produced  at  times,  and  does 
not  require  the  operation  of  human  agency  in  order  that  it  may  be  produced. 

Q.     Is  that  spontaneous  product  a  step  towards  destruction  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     And  is  not  produced  by  any  mechanical  or  chemical  action  ? 

A.    It  requires  no  extraordinary  action. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HENRY  J.  BIGELOW,  M.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)   You  are  both  a  practising  physician  and  surgeon  ? 

A .    'Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Were  you  in  part  educated  abroad,  on  the  continent  of  Europe  ? 

A.    I  studied  abroad  some  three  or  four  years,  about  twenty  years  ago. 

Q.     How  much  time  did  you  spend  abroad  ? 

A.     About  three  years. 

Q.     Have  you  revisited  Europe  since  then  ? 

A.     I  have  been  there  at  two  intervals. 

Q.     Did  you  travel  pretty  extensively  on  the  continent  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir.     I  have  travelled  as  most  people  do,  north  and  south. 

Q.     In  what  countries  ? 

A-  England,  France,  Italy,  Egypt,  Germany,  Switzerland,  and  other 
places, 

Q.  Have  you  any  opinion  as  to  the  effect  produced  upon  the  health  of  the 
people  of  the  vine-growing  countries,  by  the  use  of  wine  as  a  daily  beverage  ? 


406  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  should  judge  from  observation  of  people  as  you  see  them,  and  from 
the  entire  absence  of  evidence  of  the  injurious  effects,  that  it  was  not 
injurious  in  any  way.  And  I  infer  that  it  might  in  some  cases  be  beneficial. 

Q.  What  did  you  observe  in  your  several  visits  in  reference  to  the 
sobriety  and  the  habits  of  intoxication  of  the  people  there,  either  one  way  or 
the  other  ? 

A.  I  should  say  there  was  a  very  marked  absence  of  anything  like  intoxi- 
cation as  you  see  it  upon  the  surface  of  society. 

Q.  Do  you  say  that  in  regard  to  those  peoples  who  use  wine  daily  as  a 
part  of  their  daily  food  ? 

A.    I  speak  of  those. 

Q.  Is  it,  or  not,  your  opinion  that  the  wine  that  they  used  did  perform 
the  office  of  food  ? 

A.    I  have  no  doubt  that  it  did  to  a  certain  extent. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  attribute  a  good  effect  as  food  to  the 
alcohol  or  the  other  ingredients  ? 

A.     To  the  alcohol  in  combination  with  other  ingredients. 

Q.  In  relation  to  the  influence  of  wine  upon  the  general  health,  are  you 
able  to  state  whether  the  long-continued  use  of  wine  results  in  any  common 
class  of  diseases,  insanity  for  example,  in  any  considerable  number  of  cases  ? 
Say,  take  it  in  France. 

A.    Not  to  my  knowledge,  where  taken  temperately. 

Q.     By  temperately,  you  are  speaking  of  its  use  habitually  with  the  meals  ? 

A*  Habitually  upon  the  meals ;  and  based  upon  the  fact  that  the  light 
wines  are  constantly  drank,  year  in  and  year  out,  in  almost  any  community 
in  France. 

Q.    You  speak  of  wines  that  have  not  been  reinforced  at  all  ? 

A.     Of  wines  as  they  are  found. 

Q.  Is  it  not  found  that  a  very  large  per  cent,  of  the  insanity  of  France  is 
attributable  to  the  habits  of  the  people  in  this  respect  ? 

A.    lam  not  aware  that  it  is,  to  the  extent  of  insanity  from  other  causes. 

Q.    You  would  admit  that  wine  is  one  of  the  causes  ? 

A.  When  taken  to  excess,  it  is  liable  to  produce  intoxication,  of  course, 
and  that  produces  insanity  as  one  of  its  general  results. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  moderate  use  of  intoxicating  beverages  in  this  coun- 
try, have  you  observed  that  any  class  of  diseases  manifests  itself  as  the  appa- 
rent consequence  of  such  use,  though  continued  to  be  moderate  ? 

A.  Undoubtedly  diseases  occur  in  certain  cases  as  the  result  of  alcohol, 
but  the  same  diseases  result  without  assignable  causes.  A  man  who,  you 
would  suppose,  would  not  resist  the  effect  of  alcohol,  will  live  a  long  and 
comparatively  healthy  life ;  while  another  man,  whom  you  would  suppose  to  be 
able  to  encounter  the  effect  of  comparatively  large  doses  of  alcohol,  may  suc- 
cumb. I  do  not  think  there  is  any  doubt  that  in  some  cases  it  will  produce 
disease.  If  you  asked  me  whether  there  were  certain  diseases  which  have 
been  recognized,  and  which  are  based  on  alcohol,  I  should  answer,  yes ;  dis- 
eases of  the  liver  for  instance. 

Q.  I  would  ask  whether,  in  the  numerous  cases  of  supposed  harmless  use 
of  liquors  of  different  kinds,  in  men  from  fifty  to  sixty  years  old,  they  have 


APPENDIX.  407 

never  received  any  harm  from  it  ?  Would  you  consider  such  use  harmless,  or 
would  you  expect  to  see  chronic  diseases  resulting  from  it  ? 

A.  If  alcohol  were  used  to  produce  a  stimulating  effect  alone,  I  should 
not  expect  diseases  ;  but  if  it  were  used  to  excess,  so  as  to  produce  a  narcotic 
effect,  I  should  expect  diseases  to  result. 

Q.     Are  these  different  stages  of  the  same  cause  ? 

A.    I  incline  to  the  belief  that  there  is  a  characteristic  difference. 

Q.     So  that  one  does  not  lead  into  the  other  ? 

A.  So  that  you  can  put  your  finger  upon  the  interval,  and  say  that  one  is 
a  stimulant  effect,  and  that  the  other  is  a  narcotic  effect. 

Q.     How  is  the  stimulant  effect,  as  compared  with  the  narcotic  effect. 

A.  In  the  stimulant  effect,  the  circulation  is  not  necessarily  accelerated. 
When  we  speak  of  the  effect  of  alcohol,  I  think  we  are  apt  to  associate  a 
stimulated  pulse  with  it ;  and  yet  a  man  in  a  fever  may  take  a  stimulant  and 
reduce  his  pulse. 

Q.  Does  it  change  the  pulse  by  changing  the  general  circulation  of  the 
system,  as  to  the  distribution  of  the  circulating  fluids  in  the  system  ?  I  have 
supposed  that  the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages  changed  the  pulsations  of  the 
circulation  in  the  system.  Is  that  the  case,  or  is  it  a  quickening  of  the 
circulation  ? 

A.     That  might  be  one  effect. 

Q.    When  it  reduces  a  fever,  what  is  the  effect  ? 

A.  I  take  it  that  it  tends  to  reduce  the  circulation  towards  its  normal  con- 
dition. It  is  then  called  a  febrifuge,  because  it  drives  out  fever. 

Q.  The  broad  question,  whether  the  stimulative  effects  and  the  narcotic 
effects  are  characteristically  different,  stands  relative  to  this  question  of  the 
general  effect  upon  the  circulation,  does  it  not  ? 

A.  The  circulation  may  be  affected  by  both  the  stimulated  and  the 
narcotized  condition.  In  that  way  they  stand  related. 

Q.  Are  modifications  of  the  circulation  of  the  same  general  character,  and 
in  the  same  general  direction  when  acting  under  the  stimulating  as  when 
under  the  narcotic  effect. 

A.    I  think  not. 

Q,    Not  in  the  same  general  direction  ? 

A.    Not  in  the  same  general  direction. 

Q.  So  that  there  is  a  change  of  direction,  when  the  change  passes  from 
the  stimulative  to  the  narcotic  effect. 

A.  When  you  speak  of  direction,  that  gives  an  idea  that  there  is  a  change 
upwards  or  downwards.  There  is  a  difference  in  the  pulse  under  the  stimu- 
lative and  under  the  narcotic  effect. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  I  would  inquire  whether,  so  far  as  your  observa- 
tion goes,  the  practice  of  physicians  is  to  abstain  entirely  from  the  use  of 
wine,  or  from  any  liquor  as  a  beverage*  ? 

A.  I  should  think  that,  as  a  rule,  they  did  not  abstain,  sir.  I  should  give 
that  opinion  with  some  belief  in  its  force. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  AVERT.)  With  reference  to  the  prescribing  of  wine  or 
ardent  spirits,  has,  or  not,  that  practice  grown  within  the  last  ten  years  among 
practitioners  ? 


408  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  should  say  that  the  beneficial  effects  of  wines  and  spirits  as  a  stimu- 
lus, were  better  understood  than  formerly ;  that  while,  formerly,  the  stimulat- 
ing and  narcotic  effects  were  confounded,  the  stimulative  and  beneficial  effects 
are  now  better  understood:  It  is  understood  that  a  man  may  increase  vitality 
for  the  time  being — may  make  himself  better  able  to  work  for  the  time  being, 
by  using  these  wines  and  stimulants  ;  and  from  the  fact  of  their  being  better 
understood  by  the  physicians  and  the  public,  I  have  no  doubt  that  their  use 
has  been  increased  in  that  way. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  As  the  practice  of  physicians  is  supposed  to  be 
weighty  upon  the  general  habits  and  health  of  the  community  (and  I  suppose 
you  have  reference  to  that),  I  would  like  to  inquire  if  opium,  so  far  as  you 
know,  is  used  among  physicians  at  all  ? 

A.  A  good  many  of  my  medical  friends  smoke.  I  think  I  do  not  happen 
to  remember  anybody  that  uses  opium. 

Q.  Do  you  regard  your  friends  who  smoke  as,  in  that  practice,  acting  upon 
scientific  principles,  and  as  exemplifying  and  practising  what  they  have 
theoretically  demonstrated  ? 

A.  I  consider  that  when  they  smoke  they  really  act  upon  scientific  prin- 
ciples ;  and  that,  whether  intentionally  or  not,  they  do  demonstrate  and 
practise  what  they  have  theoretically  taught. 

Q.     Do  you  regard  smoking  as  beneficial  in  any  way  ? 

A.     As  a  stimulant;  not  as  a  narcotic,  but  used  in  moderation. 

Q.  Do  you  believe,  as  a  general  practice,  that  the  human  economy  requires 
stimulants  other  than  the  food  providentially  placed  before  us  would  furnish  ? 
Does  the  machinery  of  the  human  economy  run  better  or  longer  with  artificial 
stimulants  ? 

A.  I  would  answer  yes,  in  certain  cases;  and  I  will  tell  you  why. 
Using  stimulus  at  any  given  time  enables  a  man  who  is  a  little  exhausted,  for 
example,  to  do  more  work  at  that  time.  It  arrests  disintegration  for  that 
time,  and  enables  him  to  put  his  work  into  that  particular  time  ;  and  in  that 
way  it  is  to  be  viewed  as  an  immense  convenience  in  the  every-day  workings 
of  life.  As  disintegration  (if  you  choose  to  go  into  it  from  that  point  of 
view)  is  temporarily  arrested,  he*  is  saved  from  exhaustion,  and  enabled  to 
do  his  work.  At  some  subsequent  time  he  must  lie  still,  and,  perhaps,  he 
must  give  his  machine  an  opportunity  to  catch  up,  for  having  taxed  it  at  the 
moment  that  disintegration  was  arrested.  If  you  compare  this  with  his  con- 
dition if  he  had  been  obliged  to  do  a  certain  amount  of  work  when  he  was 
exhausted,  you  will  see  the  advantage.  The  man  will  come  out  at  the  end 
of  the  year  stronger  by  having  taken  a  stimulant  at  the  time,  and  having 
rested  afterwards,  than  he  would  if  he  had  not. 

Q.     That  is,  he  would  come  out  better  in  an  extreme  exigency  ? 

A.     I  mean  the  exigencies  of  life.     I  do  not  mean  an  extreme  exigency. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  the  ordinary  usages  of  society  require  the  use  of 
stimulants  ? 

A.     Undoubtedly,  like  all  habits,  this  habit  is  liable  to  excess. 

Q.    Is  that  the  strongest  remark  you  -would  make  ? 


APPENDIX.  409 

A.  I  should  say  that  excess  was  not  a  good  thing;  but,  for  a  little  excess, 
you  will  find  a  vast  amount  of  wine-drinking,  and  the  stimulus,  on  the  whole, 
to  the  advantage  of  the  individual. 

Q.  Do  the  people,  generally,  take  it  for  the  sake  of  the  beneficial  stimulus, 
or  is  it  a  fact  that,  in  ninety-nine  cases  out  of  a  hundred,  it  is  taken,  prob- 
ably, merely  for  the  pleasure  of  the  excitement  that  it  brings  ? 

A.  If  we  were  all  perfect  machines,  my  remark  would  not  apply  so  gen- 
erally ;  but,  where  people  are  over-worked,  you  will  find  a  stimulus  a  conven- 
ient and  often  harmless  thing. 

Q.     Do  you  look  for  that  time  ? 

A.     With  moderate  labor,  there  will  be  less  need  ot  stimulus. 

Q.  With  moderate  labor,  you  withdraw  the  exigency.  But  withdrawing 
the  stimulus,  do  you  suppose  that  there  is  long  life  where  the  system  is  thus 
forced  ? 

A.     "  Thus  forced  "  is  indefinite. 

Q.     Forced  as  it  is  in  the  usual  habits  about  us  ? 

A.  I  have  not  assumed  that  it  was  forced.  My  statement  was,  that,  if  it 
were  forced,  and  when  it  was  forced,  he  is  able  to  do  more  work  than  he  would 
have  been  able  otherwise  to  have  done  at  that  time. 

Q.  This  Committee  are  wishing  to  know  whether  the  drinking  habits  of  the 
community  about  us  are,  from  a  medical  point  of  view,  to  be  approbated,  toler- 
ated, or  condemned  ? 

A.  Well,  under  the  term  "  drinking  habits  of  the  community,"  we  must 
include  a  large  proportion  of  temperate  drinkers.  There  is  a  disagreeable 
association  which  attaches  to  the  word  drinker.  If  we  include  those  who  use 
wine  as  a  moderate  and  necessary  stimulus,  and  those  who  use  wine  to  excess, 
I  do  not  know  that  we  are  not  as  well  off  as  any  community. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MCCLELLAN.)  Do  you  include  the  use  of  distilled  spirits 
also? 

A.  In  answering  the  question  whether  the  present  drinking  habits  are  ben- 
eficial or  otherwise — is  that  the  question  ? 

Q  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Yes,  sir ;  whether  you  include  distilled  or  ardent 
spirits  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  that,  if  we  could  practically  exclude  ardent  spirits  and 
fall  back  on  wines,  it  would  be  better. 

Q.     Is  that  possible  in  the  existing  state  of  the  wine  market  ? 

A.  That  is  a  question  of  what  is  practicable  and  what  is  not.  That  opens 
the  whole  present  question. 

Q.  In  speaking  of  the  question  as  to  the  whole  people,  do  you  think  that 
that  answers  the  whole  question  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  I  understand  your  question. 

Q.  The  question  was,  whether  the  drinking  usages  of  society,  including  all 
alcoholic  beverages,  are  to  be  approbated,  tolerated,  or  condemned  ?  You 
remarked  that  we  were  not  any  worse  off  than  our  neighbors. 

A.     The  first  question  is  concerning  approbation.   I  do  not  know  that  you 
can  approve  a  thing,  in  which  there  are  advantages  and  disadvantages,  with- 
out going  a  good  deal    into    the    exact    proportion    of  advantages    and 
disadvantages.    The  next  question  is  of  toleration.    That  again  raises  the 
52 


410  APPENDIX. 

whole  question.  In  reply  to  that,  I  should  say  that  what  could  not  be  cured 
must  be  endured. 

Q.     What  for  the  third  question  ? 

A.  That  would  raise  the  question  whether  it  was  to  be  condemned  on  the 
grounds  of  morality  or  expediency  ? 

Q.     Or  health  ? 

A.     Health,  also. 

Q.     Or  altogether  ? 

A.  On  the  grounds  of  morality,  I  think  it  is  not  to  be  repudiated  as  a 
whole. 

Q.  On  the  whole,  you  would  say  that  the  drinking  usages  of  the  com- 
munity about  us  are  to  be  reprobated  or  deplored  ? 

A.     Deplored  ?    No,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  The  question  has  been  asked  once  or  twice  in 
regard  to  the  wines  prescribed  by  physicians  here.  I  would  like  to  ask  you 
whether,  in  your  practice,  you  are  in  the  habit  of  prescribing  wines  to  be 
bought  of  the  State  Agent  ?  whether  or  not  these  wines  are  used  by  the  State 
Agent  to  your  knowledge  ? 

A.  I  can  only  give  my  general  impressions  on  that  point.  I  should  not  go 
to  the  State  Agent  for  good  wines  or  spirits. 

TESTIMONY  OF  D.  H.  STOKER,  M.  D. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  You  have  been  a  practising  physician  for  many 
years  in  Boston  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  find  any  use  for  alcoholic  stimulus  in  the  profession  ? 

A.     Most  assuredly. 

Q.     What  do  you  find  to  be  its  action  ? 

A.     Beneficial,  or  of  course  we  should  not  give  it. 

Q.     What  kind  of  action  has  it  ? 

A.  It  is  generally  given  where  there  is  prostration  and  debility,  to  act  upon 
the  stomach  and  to  assist  digestion.  We  generally  give  it  as  a  stimulus. 

TESTIMONY  OP  CIIARLES  T.  JACKSON,  M.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     You  have  been  a  chemist  for  many  years  ? 

A.     I  have,  sir. 

Q.     Not  a  practising  physician  ? 

A.  Not  a  practising  physician.  I  was  originally  a  practising  physician, 
but  retired.  I  am  engaged  now  more  particularly  in  chemistry  and  geology. 

Q.  What  do  you  find  to  be  the  relations  which  alcoholic  stimulants  bear 
to  the  human  animal  economy  ? 

A.  Alcohol  and  alcoholic  liquors  act  as  respiratory  food.  When  alcohol, 
either  in  the  form  of  wine  or  in  the  form  of  any  of  our  distilled  spirits  suffi- 
ciently diluted  with  water,  is  drank,  it  goes  into  the  circulation.  The  alcohol 
takes  the  place  of  so  much  food  in  our  bodies  in  the  processes  of  respiration. 
The  carbon  and  the  hydrogen  are  oxydized  and  removed  from  the  system, 
and  thus  save  the  consumption  of  just  so  much  of  our  tissues.  Different 
spirits  and  different  wines  contain  different  ingredients.  Brandy  contains 


APPENDIX.  411 

cenanthic  ether,  which  stimulates  the  heart.  Whiskey  contains  fusel  oil,  which 
operates  upon  the  lungs  and  also  upon  the  liver.  Gin  stimulates  especially 
the  kidneys;  taken  in  excess  it  acts  injuriously  upon  the  liver.  The  moderate 
use  of  alcoholic  drinks,  so  far  from  doing  any  harm  to  the  human  body,  serves 
to  sustain  its  powers  of  endurance,  and  saves  the  destruction  of  so  much  of 
our  tissues,  and  is,  therefore,  conservative  to  the  system.  Wines  contain 
(besides  alcohol,)  sugar,  gum,  tannin,  in  small  proportion,  cream  of  tartar, 
or  bi-tartrate  of  potash,  and  several  other  substances,  which  also  act  as 
food. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  How  do  you  reconcile  your  testimony  with  that  of 
Dr.  Clark  and  that  of  Dr.  White,  who  testified  that  the  question  of  alcohol 
serving  as  food  was  unresolved  ? 

A.    I  do  not  consider  it  unresolved.     I  heard  but  little  of  their  testimony. 

Q.  If  I  have  not  misunderstood  these  gentlemen,  particularly  Dr.  White, 
it  was,  that  while  it  had  on  the  one  hand  been  affirmed  to  be  food,  it  had  on 
the  other  hand  been  denied,  and  that  it  was  really  unresolved  ? 

A.  It  is  not  so  considered  by  scientific  men  generally.  There  may  be 
some  doubts  raised  by  some  persons  ;  but  I  think  that  the  opinion  of  scientific 
men  generally  is  the  same  on  that  point. 

Q.    Do  you  speak  of  men  in  this  country  or  of  men  abroad  ? 

A.  I  speak  of  men  abroad  who  have  made  these  subjects  a  particular 
study. 

Q.    Are  you  connected  with  Harvard  College  ? 

A.    I  have  been. 

Q.  Have  you  interchanged  opinions  with  these  persons  who  have  testified 
here,  who  are  connected  with  that  institution  ? 

A.  I  have  never  interchanged  any  opinions  upon  this  subject  with  them,  in 
conversation  particularly. 

Q.    You  have  not  been  able  to  agree  with  them  ? 

A .  I  do  not  think  that  the  question  has  ever  been  asked  between  us ;  but 
that  which  I  state  I  know  to  be  a  fact.  In  fact,  sir,  you  cannot  smell  the 
breath  of  a  drinking  person  without  knowing  that  the  alcohol  is  converted 
into  something  besides  alcohol.  You  can  smell  the  acetic  acid  in  his  breath. 
The  alcohol  has  been  converted  into  that  substance  and  exhaled. 

Q.     Do  you  mean  to  say  that  no  alcohol  is  emitted  from  the  breath  ? 

A.  There  may  be  and  there  is  probably  a  portion,  in  those  who  have  drank 
to  great  excess ;  but  in  a  person  who  uses  it  steadily  every  day,  you  will 
always  perceive  this  same  fact. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  Have  you  any  acquaintance  or  experience  with 
the  quality  of  the  liquors  of  the  State  agencies  ? 

A.  I  had  some  at  one  time,  and,  unfortunately,  rather  too  much  of  such 
knowledge. 

Q.     Will  you  state  what  is  their  character  and  reputation  ? 

A.  So  far  as  I  know,  the  reputation  is  not  very  good ;  that  is  to  say,  people 
have  mentioned  to  me  and  complained  to  me  of  the  quality  of  the  liquors,  and 
sometimes  of  liquors  that  they  said  were  sold  with  my  name  attached  to  the 
certificates.  I  cannot  prove  it ;  but  I  have  no  doubt  that  certificates  of  good 
liquors  are  used  for  selling  very  bad  ones. 


412  APPENDIX. 

Q.     That  is,  certificates  of  samples  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  know  nothing  of  the  articles,  except  from  the  samples 
which  are  sent  to  me.  I  do  not  know  that  anything  else  is  sold  ;  but  I  have 
had  information  from  Vermont  and  from  men  out  of  Massachusetts,  that  my 
name  has  been  attached  to  the  poorest  quality  of  liquors ;  and  I  was  so  much 
disgusted  with  this  that  I  called  on  a  legal  friend  in  reference  to  my  resigning 
my  connection  with  the  liquor  agency.  He  said  that  was  none  of  my  business. 
He  said  all  I  had  to  do  was  to  examine  the  liquor  that  was  brought  to  me. 

Q.     These  certificates  had  reference  to  liquors  that  were  brought  to  you  ? 

A.  They  were  for  liquor  from  that  which  had  been  brought  to  me  for 
analysis. 

Q.    During  what  period  was  that  ? 

A.     That  was  during  Mr.  Burnham's  administration. 

Q.     Do  you  say  that  persons  are  not  satisfied  with  it  ? 

A .    I  know  merely  of  people  preferring  to  send  to  New  York  for  their  liquors. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     How  extensive  is  that  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  how  extensive  it  is.  This  is  told  me  by  a  person  who  is 
well  acquainted  with  the  State  agencies,  and  knows  the  fact  that  many  peo- 
ple prefer  to  send  to  New  York,  because  of  the  unsatisfactory  character  of 
those  liquors  sold  by  the  State  agencies. 

Q.     Who  told  you  this  ? 

A.     One  of  the  former  State  agents ;  the  agents,  not  the  commissioners. 

Q.     Do  you  recollect  his  name  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  but  I  have  no  right  to  give  it  here.  I  can  give  it  if  it  is 
required. 

Q.    Was  he  a  man  that  was  employed  by  the  State  agency  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;  and  resigned  in  disgust. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  Do  you  personally  know  what  kinds  of  liquors 
are  sold  by  the  State  agents  at  present  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Have  you  known  for  the  last  twelve  months  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  know  anything  but  mere  rumor  ? 

A.  Of  course  I  have  never  had  anything  to  do  with  it,  except  to  examine 
the  liquors  which  are  brought  to  me. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  I  would  inquire  whether  it  is  a  matter  of  reputa- 
tion among  medical  men  using  it  as  a  medicine  ? 

A.  My  more  intimate  acquaintance  is  with  the  office  in  Boston.  But  I  do 
not  think  that  the  physicians  care  anything  about  the  State  agency.  They 
send  to  the  liquor-dealers  who  have  the  best  reputation.  I  do  not  think  that 
the  physicians  know  much  about  the  agency  or  care  anything  about  it. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     Then  they  do  not  care  anything  about  it  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DR.  GEORGE  DERBY. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Please  state  any  observations  that  you  may  have 
made  in  regard  to  the  workings  of  the  prohibitory  liquor  law  in  the  State  of 
Maine. 


APPENDIX.  413 

A.  I  was  a  resident  of  Augusta,  Maine,  throughout  the  year  1865,  in 
charge  of  the  United  States  hospital.  I  had  a  large  number  of  men  under 
my  care  throughout  the  year.  They  were  more  or  less  demoralized  by  the 
free  and  unrestricted  sale  of  liquors,  of  a  bad  character,  in  that  town.  It  was 
a  source  of  a  great  deal  of  trouble  to  me,  and  one  that  I  was  not  able  entirely 
to  remove. 

Q.  Did  you  notice  anything  as  to  the  fact  of  the  use  of  liquor  among  the 
people  generally  ? 

A.    There  was  a  great  deal  of  dissipation. 

Q.    As  well  as  among  those  under  your  care  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OP  DR.  EDWARD  H.  CLARKE,  (continued.) 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     Did  you  hear  the  testimony  of  Dr.  Jackson  ? 

A.    I  did. 

Q.  Will  you  state  to  the  Committee  whether  or  not  there  is  any  difference 
between  your  testimony  and  his  ? 

Q.  Not  at  all.  What  he  said  was  perfectly  correct,  and  entirely  in 
accordance  with  what  I  stated. 

Q.  Is  there  any  difference  between  his  testimony  and  the  testimony  of  Dr. 
White? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Did  or  did  not  Dr.  White  testify  directly  that  it 
was  an  unsolved  question,  whether  alcohol  was  food  or  assimilated  at  all  into 
the  system  ? 

A.  I  did  not  understand  Dr.  White  to  go  into  that.  I  saw  no  difference 
between  the  two  doctors  in  that  particular.  The  scientific  points,  as  I  under- 
stood them  from  Dr.  Jackson,  those  stated  by  myself,  and  those  stated  by  Dr. 
White,  I  should  say  were  precisely  the  same. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  your  testimony  and  that  of  Dr.  White  entirely 
correspond,  in  regard  to  the  transformation  of  alcohol  in  the  human 
economy  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Adjourned. 


414  APPENDIX. 


TWELFTH    DAY. 

TUESDAY,  March  12,  1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  -9  o'clock,"  A.  M.,  and  the  introduction  ^of  evidence 
by  the  counsel  for  the  petitioners  was  concluded,  with  a  single  exception,  by 
the  testimony  of  the  two  following  witnesses  :  — 

TESTIMONY  OF  JULES  E.  SOUCHARD. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  at  this  moment  ? 

A.    In  Boston. 

Q.     What  is  your  position  here  ? 

A.     French  Consul. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)     How  many  years  have  you  been  French  Consul  ? 

A.     Eleven  years. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  I  wish  to  inquire  of  you  in  regard  to  the  fact, 
whether  French  wines,  as  introduced  into  this  country,  are  in  the  same  pure 
state  as  in  France  ?  Or  are  they  fortified,  as  it  is  called,  by  the  addition  of 
alcohol  ? 

A.  It  is  my  opinion  that  the  French  wine  is  mostly,  if  not  almost  every 
time,  imported  here  almost  as  pure  as  it  is  used  in  France. 

Q.     Is  there  any  difficulty  in  importing  it  ? 

A.  There  is  no  difficulty.  There  is  wine  of  course  which  cannot  be 
imported  at  all;  but  every  wine  that  can  bear  crossing  the  sea  may  be 
imported  pure.  And  I  do  not  suppose  that  the  addition  of  alcohol  would 
make  it  any  better  to  bear  transportation. 

Q.     The  light  wines,  the  clarets,  etc.,  do  they  come  in  the  same  condition  ? 

A.     They  are  covered  by  the  same  condition. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     Are  you  in  the  business  ? 

A.     No,  sir ;  I  have  no  business  except  my  consulship. 

Q.     What  is  your  knowledge  of  these  facts  ? 

A.    I  have  imported  wine  myself,  for  my  own  use,  for  the  last  ten  years  ;' 
and  I  always  found  it  perfectly  pure.    I  have  bought  wine  here  several  times, 
and  I  believe  that  wine  was  adulterated. 

Q.  Take  the  other  wines,  are  you  sure  that  they  have  not  been  in  the  habit 
of  enforcing  them  with  brandy  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  they  enforce  them  with  brandy.  It  may  be  that 
wine  is  sometimes  enforced  with  stronger  wine,  in  order  to  bring  it  to  its 
proper  standard. 

Q.    Would  it  not  be  an  easier  process  to  put  in  a  little  brandy  ? 

A.    No  ;  brandy  would  be  detected. 

Q.    But  it  is  the  same  material  as  wine  ? 

A.    But  it  would  detract  from  the  wine. 

Q.    Do  you  consider  yourself  a  judge  in  the  matter  ? 


APPENDIX.  415 

A.  I  have  not  considered  myself  a  judge  in  the  matter  any  more  than 
this,  that  any  man  who  is  accustomed  to  drink  wine  knows  something  about 
it.  And  besides  that,  my  position  here  obliges  me  to  be  connected  with 
importers  of  wine  and  to  know  about  it. 

Q.    I  would  ask  if  there  are  not  a  great  many  adulterated  wines  in  Paris  ? 

A.  I  think  there  are  very  few,  because  the  law  against  adulterated  wine 
is  very  stringent. 

Q.    Is  it  always  enforced  ? 

A.     Oh,  yes,  always  ;  as  much  as  possible,  at  least. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  they  do  not  import  American  whiskey  and  alcohol, 
to  put  into  the  wines  ? 

A.  I  do  not  believe  they  import  it  to  put  with  wine.  They  import  whiskey 
and  rum,  but  not  for  that  purpose. 

Q.    Is  there  not  a  great  deal  of  talk  in  Paris  about  adulterated  wines  ? 

A.  Of  course  there  are  some  bad  wines;  and  people  are  inclined  to  think 
that  bad  wine  is  adulterated  wine.  But  it  is  a  very  difficult  thing  in  Paris  to 
have  adulterated  wine. 

Q.  Are  there  not  frequent  seizures  of  liquors  in  Paris,  and  investigations, 
in  order  to  learn  whether  the  wines  are  not  adulterated  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir, — I  do  not  know  whether  there  are  frequent  seizures,  but  there 
are  frequent  investigations. 

Q.  But  you  think  that  there  are  frequent  cases  where  they  are  adul- 
terated? 

A.    Not  very  often ;  but  of  course  there  are  sometimes  cases. 

<2.  You  say  it  is  a  very  general  impression  that  the  wines  of  this  charac- 
ter are  adulterated  ? 

A.  No.  I  say  the  contrary.  I  say  that  my  impression  is  that  they  are 
not  adulterated. 

Q.     Did  you  ever  hear  much  of  the  Oporto  wines  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir  ;  but  I  could  not  give  any  opinion  about  them. 

Q.  Did  you  never  hear  the  historical  fact  that  they  were  formerly  sent  from 
Oporto  to  the  Channel  Islands,  ordinarily,  and  were  there  re-packed  and 
sent  to  England  ? 

A.     No ;  I  never  heard  it. 

TESTIMONY  OF  MATTHEW  J.  FASSIN. 
Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 
A.     In  New  York. 
Q.     What  is  your  business  ? 
A.     Wine-importer. 
Q.     What  wines  do  you  import  ? 
A.    From  France  and  from  Germany. 

Q.    I  would  inquire  whether  wines  are  imported  from  France  in  their  pure 
state,  without  adulteration  and  enforcing  ? 
A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  is  that  fact  generally  ?     Are  they,  as  a  general  thing,  sold  pure  ? 
A.     As  pure  as  the  market  of  Oporto  and  Burgundy  gives. 


416  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Is  there  any  difficulty  in  bringing  them  across  the  water  without 
enforcing  ? 

A.    Not  at  all,  sir. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)    Is  there  much  Oporto  wine  imported  here  ? 

A .    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Does  it  come  direct  from  Oporto  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  through  some  of  the  Oporto  wine  is  made  in  Marseilles. 

Q.    What  do  you  believe  they  do  with  it  in  Marseilles  ? 

A.     They  have  a  heavy  wine  there  which  is  only  made  in  Marseilles. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  that  some  thirty  years  ago  they  used  to  import  a 
good  deal  of  Oporto  wine  and  repack  it  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  because  I  was  not  in  business  at  that  time. 

Q.  T}o  you  not  think  that  they  used  to  send  hundreds  and  hundreds  of 
hogsheads  from  the  Channel  Islands  to  England,  where  they  did  not  send  a 
single  hogshead  from  Oporto  to  the  Channel  Islands  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  anything  about  it. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  importing  wines  pure  ?  Do  you  mean  simple 
juice  of  the  grape  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    You  think  that  is  generally  the  case  ? 

A.  It  is  generally  the  case.  Of  course  we  have  in  France  and  in  Bur- 
gundy inspectors  of  the  amount  of  the  revenue.  And  if  it  was  a  different 
wine,  then  it  would  not  be  exported. 

Q.  Suppose  that,  for  instance,  you  take  sherry,  which  has  eight  or  ten  per 
cent,  of  alcohol  in  it,  and  that  you  put  in  four  or  five  per  cent,  of  brandy, 
being  the  same  material  as  the  wine  itself,  can  any  chemist  detect  it  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  is  that  possible  when  it  is  the  same  material  ? 

A.  It  is  not  the  same  material.  In  making  brandy,  we  are  obliged  to 
burn  the  grape.  The  wine  is  made  by  fermentation. 

Q.  Then  the  alcohol  of  the  brandy  and  the  alcohol  of  the  wine  are  two 
different  articles  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)    You  are  a  native  of  France  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    How  long  have  you  been  in  this  country  ? 
.  A.     Since  1848. 

Q.     Are  you  frequently  there  ? 

A.    I  have  been  in  France  five  times  since. 

Q.  In  wine-growing  countries,  how  general  is  the  use  of  wine  among  the 
people  ? 

A.    Everybody  drinks  wine, — the  children  as  well  as  others. 

Q.     Any  intoxication  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  very  little.  The  intoxication  is  sometimes  from  brandy,  but 
not  by  wine. 

Q.  How  are  the  habits  of  the  people  in  that  country,  as  regards  intoxica- 
tion, as  compared  with  New  York  ? 

A.     There  is  a  very  great  difference. 


APPENDIX.  417 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Did  you  ever  know  of  the  habit  of  the  "laboring 
people  of  Paris  to  go  on  Sunday  outside  of  the  limits  of  the  city,  where  they 
can  get  wine  without  duty,  and  their  spending  the  day  in  drinking  to  excess  ? 

A.    It  is  very  seldom  that  you  find  people  drinking  to  excess. 

Q.  Excess  of  wine  does  not  show  itself  as  excess  of  ardent  spirits  does 
there,  I  suppose  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    But  does  it  not  throw  them  into  a  stupid,  silly  state  ? 

A.    I  have  no  remembrance  of  any  cases  of  that  kind. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Did  you  ever  hear  of  insanity  from  the  use  of 
wines  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Have  you  any  doubt  that  it  exists,  and  that  from  the  using  of  wine  ? 

A.    I  do  not  think  it  does. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  a  work,  lately  published  by  a  certain  charitable  institu- 
tion, which  gives  information  upon  that  subject  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Would  you  be  surprised  to  learn  that  a  very  large  per  cent,  of  the 
insanity  of  that  country  comes  from  the  using  of  wines  ? 

A .    I  should  be  surprised. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  In  making  brandy  from  grapes,  would  they  do  it 
without  burning  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     Can  you  get  alcohol  without  burning  it  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

A  statement  was  submitted  to  the  Committee  in  behalf  of  the  counsel  for 
the  Petitioners  relative  to  what  was  claimed  on  their  behalf,  as  follows : — 

"  1.  That  the  several  municipalities  of  the  Commonwealth  be  allowed  by 
law  to  permit  the  retail  sale,  under  municipal  regulation,  and  subject  also  to 
police  regulation  by  the  Commonwealth,  of  spirituous  and  fermented  liquors, 
by  taverners,  victuallers,  grocers  and  apothecaries ;  licenses  being  granted,  in 
such  numbers  and  to  such  persons  as  the  public  convenience  may,  in  the 
judgment  of  the  municipality,  require. 

"  2.  All  licensed  places  shall  be  subject  to  police  visitation,  and  the  liquors 
kept  for  sale  shall  be  subject  to  inspection  under  superintendence  of  a  Board 
of  Commissioners  appointed  by  the  Governor ;  such  regulations  being  enacted 
by  law  relative  thereto  as  will  best  promote  the  purity  of  the  liquors  offered 
for  sale,  and  guard  the  people  against  imposition  by  adulteration  or  otherwise. 

"  3.  The  existing  provisions  of  law  which  forbid  the  manufacture  of  cider 
and  its  sale  by  the  manufacturer,  and  those  also  which  forbid  the  sale  of  spir- 
ituous and  fermented  liquors  at  wholesale  (or  in  quantities  of  not  less  than 
twenty-eight  gallons  in  each  package,)  and  those  which  forbid  their  manufacture 
to  be  sold  according  to  law,  should  be  repealed. 

"  4.  The  provisions  of  the  existing  statutes  shall  remain  in  force  against  all 
persons  manufacturing  or  selling  contrary  to  law,  whether  without  license  or 
in  violation  of  their  license." 

The  opening  statement  in  behalf  of  the  Eemonstrants,  was  submitted  by 
Hon.  A.  HUNTINGTON,  and  a  brief  further  statement  was  submitted  by 
W.  B.  SPOONER,  Esq. 
53 


418  APPENDIX. 

The  Committee  then  proceeded  to  the  consideration  of  evidence  introduced 
on  the  part  of  the  Remonstrants. 

TESTIMONY  OF  CHARLES  STODDARD. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Will  you  state  for  how  many  years  you  have  been 
a  resident  of  Boston  ? 

A.    I  have  resided  here  for  more  than  half  a  century. 

Q.    What  business  and  what  church  relations  do  you  sustain  ? 

A.    I  am  a  merchant  and  connected  with  the  Old  South  Church. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  what  views  you  may  entertain  on  the 
question  here  in  debate  with  particular  reference  to  the  policy  of  prohibition 
of  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  beverage,  or  the  license  system  ? 

A.  I  have  been  astonished,  Mr.  Chairman  and  Gentlemen,  at  what  I  have 
read,  in  the  papers,  of  the  testimony  that  has  been  given  here  in  regard  to 
going  back  to  the  dark  ages.  It  is  a  most  astonishing  thing  to  me  that  good 
men  (for  they  are  good  men),  should  advocate  going  back  into  the  middle 
ages  from  the  19th  century  ;  and  such  I  regard  going  back  to  any  sort  of  license 
law.  And  it  has  occurred  to  me,  as  I  have  read  these  reports,  that  most  of 
those  who  have  testified  here  must  have  been  recently  born.  I  have  lived 
here  fifty  years  or  more,  and  have  been  acquainted  with  the  conditions  of 
things  under  both  systems.  We  know  what  a  license  law  is  ;  a  stringent  law 
and  one  that  is  not  stringent.  We  know  all  about  it.  We  have  fought  that 
fight  and  we  are  never  going  to  return  to  it,  sir.  Mark  my  words.  In  this  city, 
and  in  this  town  before  it  was  a  city,  it  was  very  difficult  to  deal  with  this 
matter.  Mr.  Quincy  was  our  first  mayor,  with  the  exception  of  Mr. 
Phillips,  who  was  here  one  year ;  and  a  better  mayor  we  never  had.  He  was 
on  his  horse  at  five  o'clock  in  the  morning,  and  used  to  bow  to  me,  for  I  was 
up  at  that  time  ;  and  he  used  to  say  to  me,  "  If  there  is  any  stench  around 
your  house  let  me  know."  He  went  all  around  the  city,  and  he  hunted  out 
the  nuisances  at  the  west  part  of  the  town,  and  he  scattered  the  courtezans. 
Some  people  said  that  he  scattered  the  disease,  but  did  not  destroy  it.  We 
have  had  a  good  many  mayors  since  then,  and  we  have  had  a  good  many  laws. 
I  think  that  the  best  law  that  has  been  on  the  statute  book  since  I  have 
been  on  the  stage,  is  the  present  one ;  because  it  is  on  the  right  principle, 
and  that  is  on  the  principle  of  prohibiting  that  which  is  an  immorality.  Sell- 
ing rum  to  men  and  women  in  this  Commonwealth  for  the  purpose  of  gaining 
gold,  is  an  immorality.  If  that  which  sends  men  to  jails  and  penitentiaries, 
;and  that  which  fills  almshouses  with  paupers,  and  that  which  fills  the  streets 
with  men  who  are  drunk,  is  not  an  immorality,  there  is  nothing  which  is  an 
immorality  for  which  there  is  any  statute  in  our  law  books,  and  every  man 
knows  it.  It  is  an  infamous  business  ;  and  the  only  inducement  which  there 
is  to  it  which  was  ever  advocated,  was  to  get  gold.  It  is  gold  versus  misery. 
Now,  if  there  is  any  law  which  the  women  and  children  are  in  favor  of,  it  is 
the  present  prohibitory  law.  The  women  and  children  are  against  this  law 
to  a  man;  and  if  you  cannot  fix  it  in  any  other  way,  let  us  have  the  women 
vote  on  it,  and  see  how  the  thing  will  come  out. 

Q.  What  is  your  condition  of  mind  as  to  the  influence  of  the  liquor- 
, dealers  in.tHis. matter  ? 


APPENDIX.  419 

A.     I  have  not  their  acquaintance,  sir. 

Q.     How  do  they  seem  to  like  the  present  law  ? 

A.     Who  is  moving  for  its  repeal,  if  they  are  not  ? 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Perhaps  Mr.  Hardy. 

A,     Mr.  Hardy  is  drawn  into  a  false  position,  as  you  know. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  feel  it  to  be  clearly  a  matter  of  fact  that  this 
is  the  liquor-dealers'  enterprise  ? 

A.  It  is  a  question  between  gold  and  those  who  are  not  making  it  in  this 
traffic. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  a  license  system  could  be  made  to  interfere  with 
the  traffic  as  it  is  at  present  ? 

A*  I  do  not  know,  sir.  I  was  foreman  of  a  grand  jury  of  this  Common- 
wealth in  1843,  and  if  you  will  allow  me  I  will  make  a  reference  to  the 
finding  of  their  inquest :  of  the  cases  that  came  under  their  cognizance,  during 
three  months,  two  hundred  and  nine  were  against  morals,  and  one  hundred 
and  nine  against  property ;  almost  two  to  one.  The  cases  against  morals 
were  brought  against  the  sale  of  ardent  spirits.  I  think  at  that  time  there 
were  no  licenses  in  Boston  ;  but  there  were  people  selling,  and  selling  after 
midnight  on  Saturday.  That  is  the  testimony  that  came  before  the  grand 
jury  at  that  time.  It  was  in  evidence  before  the  grand  jury,  that  more  than 
one  hundred  persons,  mostly  young  men,  were  passed  by  one  of  our  city 
police  officers  between  the  hours  of  twelve  and  two  o'clock  on  Saturday 
night,  in  his  walk  between  Cornhill  Square  and  Cambridge  St.,  all  in  a  state 
of  partial  or  entire  intoxication.  They  were  Cambridge  students  and  others, 
who  came  down  to  Cornhill  Square,  which  was  a  capital  place  in  those  times 
to  get  liquor ;  and  they  went  home  in  this  condition,  to  the  great  detriment 
of  the  public  peace  and  order. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  in  respect  to  the  efforts  to  execute  the  present 
prohibitory  law  in  Boston  ? 

A.  So  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  observe,  sir,  with  the  exception  of  the 
efforts  of  the  State  Constabulary  force,  there  is  no  effort  at  all. 

Q.  Have  you,  at  any  time,  so  far  as  you  have  been  able  to  observe  (and 
you  have  been,  I  suppose,  a  constant  observer),  been  able  to  find  that  any  of 
the  authorities  of  the  city,  have  shown  any  disposition  to  execute  the  present 
law? 

A.  Very  little,  I  think.  I  would  not  make  a  sweeping  assertion,  but  there 
has  been  nothing  like  what  there  should  have  been.  I  have  not  been  familiar 
with  these  things. 

Q.  There  has  been  much  testimony  introduced  here  in  regard  to  the 
increase  of  intemperance  in  the  city.  Among  what  portion  of  the  inhabi- 
tants, American  or  foreign,  according  to  your  judgment,  has  there  been  an 
increase  V 

A.  The  testimony  has  been  that  the  prohibitory  law  made  this  increase, 
though  I  have  not  been  able  to  see  it  in  any  glasses  that  I  have  had.  There 
have  been  many  causes  in  the  last  few  years  for  an  increase  of  intemper- 
ance. We  have  had  a  million  of  people  disbanded  from  the  army ;  of 
course  intemperance  has  increased  from  that  cause.  And  then  we  have  a 
foreign  population  which  is  being  constantly  augmented  here. 


420  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Are  the  habits  of  the  foreign  population,  taken  together,  freer  in  this 
respect  than  they  were  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  It  is  rare  to  find  a  foreigner  that  does  not  drink  when  he 
gets  here. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  as  to  the  habits  of  drinking  in  higher  circles,  as 
compared  with  what  it  was  formerly  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is  more  fashionable  to  offer  wine  in  houses  than  it  was  twenty 
years  ago. 

Q.  In  what  particular  circles  of  the  population  of  Boston  should  you  think 
that  true  ? 

A.  Well,  sir;  it  is  certainly  true  of  the  poorer  classes.  I  do  not  know 
precisely  how  it  is  to  the  other. 

Q.  Have  you  any  reason  to  think  that  the  middling  classes  in  the  city, — 
the  laboring  men  of  the  city, — the  tolerably  well-to-do  classes,  are  less  given 
to  the  use  of  liquor  than  formerly  ? 

A.    I  have  no  reason,  from  my  knowledge,  to  think  so. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  would  be  the  vote  of  the  majority  of  the  American 
population  in  the  city  on  such  a  question  as  this  ? 

A .    Well,  sir,  I  do  not  know.    I  have  no  idea. 

Q.    You  are  yourself  associated  with  the  temperance  enterprise,  personally  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  personally,  I  have  never  drank  a  glass  of  spirits  to  my 
knowledge  since  I  was  born. 

Q.    You  are,  then,  an  original  total  abstinence  man  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  before  any  society  that  I  ever  heard  of.  I  never  used  to  have 
it  in  the  house,  and  never  used  to  offer  it  to  guests. 

Q.    Then  you  see  nothing  that  would  lead  you  to  favor  a  license  law  ? 

A .  I  should  as  soon  think  of  travelling  back  to  the  dark  ages,  and  to  put 
out  all  the  lights  of  science  and  everything  else.  I  should  go  out  myself,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  say  it  is  an  immorality  to  sell  a  glass  of  liquor 
to  drink  ? 

A.    If  I  should  answer  that  directly,  I  should  say  I  did. 

Q.    In  what  consists  the  immorality  of  that  act  ? 

A.  The  immorality  consists  in  a  man  tempting  a  fellow-creature  to  do 
wrong. 

Q.     Who  does  wrong — the  man  that  drinks  or  the  man  that  sells  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  have  two  passages  of  Scripture  on  that  point;  one  relates 
to  the  man  who  drinks  and  the  other  who  gives  wine  to  his  brother  :  "  Nor 
fornicators,  nor  covetous,  nor  drunkards,  shall  enter  the  kingdom  of  God ; " 
"  Woe  to  him  that  giveth  his  neighbor  drink,  and  that  putteth  the  bottle  to 
him  and  maketh  him  drink  also." 

Q.  Do  you  lay  it  down  as  an  immorality  to  sell  a  glass  of  liquor  to  any 
individual  ? 

A.  I  lay  it  down  as  an  immorality  to  open  a  place  to  sell  spirits  for  money, 
licensed  or  unlicensed. 

Q.  How  is  it  with  regard  to  the  State  Liquor  Agency,  which  sells  liquor 
for  money  ? 

A.    I  am  not  familiar  with  its  proceedings  at  all.    I  never  went  to  it. 


APPENDIX.  421 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  more  than  half  of  the  liquor  that  is  made  in  the 
State  of  Massachusetts  is  used  in  the  arts  ?  That  out  of  ninety-three  millions 
of  gallons  manufactured  in  this  country,  more  than  forty-three  millions  are 
used  in  the  arts.  Is  it  wrong  to  sell  it  in  your  judgment  ? 

A.  I  do  not  regard  it  as  wrong  to  make  an  article  for  that  purpose,  or  to 
sell  it  for  that  purpose.  It  is  for  drinking  and  to  make  men  drunk. 

Q.  If  a  man  goes  and  gets  a  prescription  from  a  physician,  and  sends  for 
half  a  pint  of  brandy,  is  it  wrong  that  a  man  should  sell  it  to  him  ? 

A.    I  should  think  it  might  be  tolerated,  at  any  rate. 

Q.     Does  it  come  under  what  you  call  sinful  ? 

A.    In  that  case  I  would  make  an  exception,  certainly. 

Q.  Suppose  you  give  a  strong  drink  to  him  that  is  ready  to  perish.  Is  that 
a  sin  ? 

A.     The  Scriptures  approve  of  it. 

Q.  You  do  not  mean  to  say,  then,  that  every  sale  of  liquor  to  be  drank  is 
immorality,  do  you  ? 

A.     I  would  qualify  it,  sir,  certainly. 

Q.     You  do  not  believe  it,  do  you  ? 

A.     I  do  believe  it,  sir,  in  the  open  and  indiscriminate  sale. 

Q.  You  do  not  believe  then  that  the  sale  of  liquor  to  be  drank,  is  an 
immorality  ? 

A.  I  do  believe  that  it  is  an  immorality  for  a  man  to  open  shop  and  sell 
liquor  for  drink.  The  physician  orders  it  for  him  who  has  need  of  it,  and 
if  he  has  evidence  that  there  is  occasion  for  it  to  be  used ;  but  the  dram-shop 
is  an  immorality. 

Q.  Granted.  Now  how  is  a  license  law  that  shall  permit  sales  for  those 
proper  purposes  and  forbid  it  for  all  improper  purposes,  going  back  to  the 
dark  ages  ? 

A.    Well,  sir ;  that  is  really  a  dark  problem. 

Q.  Do  you  know,  in  your  judgment,  of  any  way  in  which  the  sale  of 
liquor  shall  be  better  regulated  ?  You  admit  that  there  is  a  proper  sale  of 
liquor  to  be  drank  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.  Can  you  devise  any  way  in  which  the  public  can  be  secured  against 
the  improper  sale  and  the  public  furnished  with  a  proper  article  ?  Can  you 
devise  any  other  scheme  than  the  license  law  ? 

A.  I  have  been  told  that  the  present  law  is  a  scheme  which  covers  that 
ground. 

Q.     Do  you  ever  go  for  any  purpose  to  the  State  agency  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  not  being  unwell,  I  do  not  go  at  all. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  been  to  the  State  agency  to  get  it  for  what  you  have 
used  it  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  anything  about  the  State  agency,  personally. 

Q.     Then  how  do  you  procure  it  ? 

A.    I  do  not  procure  it. 

Q.    I  do  not  mean  in  any  improper  manner ;  but  where  do  you  procure  it  ? 

A.    I  cannot  say  where  it  is  obtained.    I  do  not  get  it  myselfl 

Q.     It  is  had  in  your  family,  is  it  not  ? 


422  APPENDIX. 

A.     Perhaps  it  is,  a  little. 

Q.     Do  you  know  what  the  provision  of  the  present  prohibitory  law  is  ? 

A.     I  do,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  think  it  is  proper  ? 

A.  1  think  it  is  an  eminently  proper  law ;  but  because  there  are  some 
little  difficulties  do  not  go  back  to  the  dark  ages.  Our  children  are  ruined, 
our  wives  are  widowed,  and  the  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts  is  injured 
for  the  sake  of  a  few  people  getting  a  little  more  gold. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  the  time  of  the  temperance  reform  in  the  days  of 
Justin  Edwards  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.     Do  you  think  there  was  any  progress  made  then  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  that  such  was  the  law  ?  Why  do  you  call  that  going 
back  to  the  dark  ages  ? 

A .  Because  I  know  what  hindered  the  carrying  out  of  the  law  at  the  time 
of  Justin  Edwards. 

Q-     How  was  it  stopped  ? 

A.  It  was  stopped  in  this  wise  :  the  family  banished  it ;  the  individuals  left 
off ;  the  hay  was  cut  without  rum ;  everything  seemed  to  be  going  on  brightly  ; 
but  the  officers  of  the  town  were  licensed  and  the  liquor  came  in  through 
them,  and  sowed  destruction,  woe  and  death. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  the  selectmen  of  the  town  were  authorized  to 
license  proper  persons  at  that  time  ? 

A.     In  many  towns  they  did  and  in  some  they  did  not. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  there  was  a  time  when  the  towns  could  not  get 
licenses  from  the  county  commissioners,  who  refused  them  indiscriminately  ? 

A.     There  was  a  time  when  there  were  no  county  commissioners. 

Q.  During  the  time  to  which  I  allude,  when  there  were  county  commis- 
sioners, are  you  not  aware  that  the  county  commissioners  in  most  all  of  the 
counties,  withheld  all  licenses  ? 

A.     They  did,  where  the  majority  was  right. 

Q.     What  was  the  fact  about  this  majority  in  these  years  ? 

A.     I  lived  in  Boston  and  I  cannot  say. 

Q.  Then  you  have  no  definite  opinion  as  to  what  the  state  of  things  was 
in  the  country  ? 

A.  I  have  a  definite  opinion,  but  it  does  not  go  into  the  particulars  ;  that 
is,  I  could  not  specify  individual  cases. 

Q.     Have  you  ever  attended  any  of  the  examinations  and  testified  here  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  I  have  sometimes  attended  here. 

Q.  If  you  could  be  persuaded  that  some  law  regulating  the  sale  of  liquor 
would  really  be  less  obstruction  to  the  cause  of  temperance  than  the  present 
state  of  things,  would  you  be  in  favor  it  ? 

A.  I  should  be  in  favor  of  the  present  state  of  things,  for  the  reason  that 
I  cannot  be  persuaded,  with  the  experience  of  half  a  century,  that  anything 
in  the  shape  of  a  license  will  promote  the  cause  of  temperance  or  retard  the 
cause  of  intemperance. 


APPENDIX.  423 

Q.  You  have  had  an  experience  of  fifty  years  under  the  prohibitory  law. 
Has  the  cause  of  temperance  increased  any  during  that  time  ? 

A.    I  have  mentioned  four  cases  beside  that. 

Q.  Is  it,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  true  that  the  cause  of  temperance  has  been 
retrograding  in  Massachusetts,  according  to  your  observation  ? 

A.  I  think  it  has  in  some  part  of  Massachusetts,  sir;  and  in  some  part  of 
the  years,  I  think  it  has  here.  Some  parts  of  these  years  I  think  it  has  been 
advancing,  but  there  are  various  causes  operating  to  effect  these  changes. 

Q.  Is  there  more  intemperance  in  Boston  now,  so  far  as  you  understand 
it,  than  there  was  a  year  ago  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  think  there  is  not  so  much -as  there  was  a  year  ago.  It  has 
astonishingly  diminished  since  last  May  ? 

Q.     Do  you  think  it  is  wrong  to  sell  a  glass  of  sweet  cider  to  anybody  ? 

A.    I  am  not  familiar  with  that  beverage,  sir. 

Q.  Taking  it  in  the  country,  do  you  believe  it  is  sinful  for  one  farmer  to 
sell  a  couple  of  gallons  of  sweet  cider  to  another, — to  sell  a  couple  of  gallons 
of  sweet  cider  to  his  neighbor,  or  to  make  it  ? 

A.  That  is  a  question  of  casuistry,  and  the  matter  of  individual  wrong  or 
individual  sin  is  very  much  involved.  The  schools  have  not  settled  it. 

Q.  Is  it  a  question  of  casuistry  as  to  whether  a  man  may  sell  a  glass  of 
sweet  cider  to  his  neighbor  ? 

A.  We  are  a  set  of  sinners,  and  those  who  do  not  sell  rum  are  no  better 
than  those  who  do ;  but  some  men  sell  liquor  for  the  purpose  of  getting  money. 
I  do  not  think  that  this  present  law  will  be  repealed  by  the  Legislature.  Or, 
if  it  is  repealed,  the  members  will  be  unseated  by  their  constituency. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SHERMAN.)  If  a  man  should  drink  coffee  to  excess,  would 
that  be  called  a  sin  ? 

A.    There  you  have  casuistry  again.    I  really  could  not  tell. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  is  any  immorality  in  drinking  ardent  spirits,  sup- 
posing a  man  knows  it  hurts  him  ? 

A.    I  think  it  is  wrong  altogether. 

Q.    But  is  it  wrong  because  his  conscience  shows  that  it  hurts  him  ? 

A.  I  have  abstained  on  this  simple  idea :  I  do  not  like  the  idea  of  dying 
a  drunkard,  if  I  can  help  it.  That  is  the  simple  thing  which  has  restrained 
me. 

Q.  I  should  like  to  ask  whether  the  immorality  consists  in  the  simple 
drinking,  or  in  the  drinking  under  a  belief  that  a  man  is  not  committed  to  the 
moderate  use? 

A.  I  think  that  the  whole  question  in  regard  to  this  subject  rests  upon  the 
ground  of  expediency.  I  do  not  think  there  is  any  sin  in  drinking  a  glass  of 
•wine.  I  think  all  these  things  are  matters  of  expediency. 

Q.     Is  there  any  sin,  then,  in  drinking  a  glass  of  cider  or  wine  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  there  is  no  sin  in  it. 

Q.     Is  there  any  sin  in  drinking  a  half  a  glass  of  brandy  ? 

A.     There  is  casuistry  again.    I  do  not  know  the  taste  of  brandy. 

Q.  Now  matter  how  it  tastes ;  is  the  man  who,  under  any  circumstances, 
or  in  any  form,  drinks  half  a  glass  of  brandy — do  you  mean  to  say  that 
in  all  cases  that  is  a  sin  ? 


424  APPENDIX. 

A.    I  never  said  that  it  was  a  sin  in  any  case. 

Q.     What  is  your  opinion  of  the  immorality  of  the  thing  ? 

A.  I  gave  my  opinion  as  to  the  immorality  of  selling  it  as  a  beverage  for 
money ;  that  is,  I  gave  my  opinion  about  it,  and  I  gave  no  opinion  about  the 
individual  cases.  It  is  the  sale  of  the  thing,  so  far  as  it  goes,  that  is  certain  to 
bring  ruin  upon  the  community.  It  is  the  right  of  every  woman  and  child  in 
this  Commonwealth  that  the  traffic  in  liquor  should  be  prohibited.  They  are 
entirely  helpless  if  we  do  not  protect  them  by  the  law. 

Q.    Is  it  not,  in  your  opinion,  wisdom  to  adopt  such  legislation  as  will 
restrain  and  prevent  this  evil  to  the  greatest  extent  ? 
.  A.    It  is. 

Q.  If  the  present  prohibitory  law  does  not  have  that  effect,  would  you  not 
try  something  else  ? 

A.  I  would,  but  I  would  give  it  a  fair  trial.  It  is  perfectly  patent  that 
this  law  has  not  had  a  fair  trial. 

Q.  If  you,  then,  were  satisfied  that  this  law  had  not  had  the  effect,  and 
would  not  have  the  effect  to  restrain  or  lessen  intemperance,  would  you  not 
think  it  a  matter  of  expediency  to  try  something  else  ? 

A .     As  at  present  advised,  I  do  not  think  so. 

Q.  Assuming  as  a  fact  that  this  law  has  not  and  does  not  promise  to  have 
that  effect,  and  that  everybody  sees  that  it  does  not,  would  you  not  prefer  to 
try  something  else  ? 

A.  That  is  an  hypothesis.  I  hope  you  will  excuse  me  from  answering 
hypotheses.  I  would  let  the  Committee  take  the  responsibility.  If  they 
report  a  law,  let  them  take  the  responsibility.  We  are  all  in  the  same  com- 
munity. We  are  no  better  than  other  people  ;  but  it  is  a  matter  of  history 
that  ruin  comes  to  the  community  that  uses  spirituous  liquor.  For  myself,  I 
think  that  if  those  gentlemen  who  have  been  up  here  and  said  that  the  law 
could  not  be  enforced  had  only  said  that  it  could  be  enforced,  it  would  be 
enforced.  It  was  said  that  it  was  of  no  use  to  try  to  suppress  the  rebellion. 
But  our  Governor  did  not  say  so.  When  the  rebellion  broke  out  the 
language  of  the  people  was,  "  Rebellion,  it  shall  be  crushed ;  the  Union,  it 
shall  be  preserved."  Just  take  the  same  ground  in  this  law,  and  it  will  go, 
and  these  people  will  hide  their  heads  who  say  that  it  cannot  be  enforced. 

Q.  Is  it  your  opinion  that  wine  ought  not  to  be  sold  to  be  used  for  the 
communion  table  ?  Is  wine  bought  for  use  at  the  communion  table  in  the 
Old  South  Church  ? 

A.  There  comes  the  casuistry  again.  Of  course  there  are  many  exceptions 
in  regard  to  the  sale  of  wine. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  What  you  mean  to  say  here,  if  I  understand  you, 
is,  that  when  these  purposes  are  provided  for  by  the  law  which  men  of  expe- 
rience and  science  have  determined  to  be  proper,  namely :  uses  for  medicine 
and  use  in  the  arts  so  far  as  may  be  necessary,  the  further  traffic  in  liquor  to 
use  it  as  a  beverage  in  the  community,  is,  from  every  point  of  view,  to  be 
condemned  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is  an  immorality  in  the  sight  of  God  and  in  the  sight  of  man, 
without  any  laws  by  the  State. 


APPENDIX.  425 

Q.  And  that  anything  which,  regarded  as  a  practice,  swells  these  social 
evils,  partakes  itself  of  the  character  of  the  evil  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  there  is  casuistry  again.  I  cannot  go  into  that  question,  and 
I  won't. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  remember  that  the  license  law  ever  did 
anything  to  restrain  the  traffic  ? 

A.  I  think  that  sometimes  there  has  been  a  spasmodic  influence  under  a 
new  mayor,  or  something  of  that  kind,  but  never  anything  effectual. 

54 


426  APPENDIX. 


THIRTEENTH    DAY. 

WEDNESDAY,  March  13, 1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  the  introduction  of  testimony 
on  behalf  of  the  remonstrants  was  resumed. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EZRA  FAENSWORTH. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  are  a  resident  of  Boston  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Do  business  in  Boston  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Where  is  your  business  location  ? 

A.     Winthrop  Square. 

Q.     What  business  are  you  in  ? 

A.     Dry  goods  and  commission  business. 

Q.    Manufactured  goods,  &c.  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  as  to  a  prohibitory  law,  as  compared  with  a 
license  law  ?  Which  is  preferable  in  your  judgment  ? 

A.    I  should  say  a  prohibitory  law,  sir. 

Q.     Have  you  any  reasons  to  give  ? 

A.  Well,  sir;  I  should  say  that,  especially  now,  in  the  present  state  of 
things,  while  the  law  is  on  the  statute-book,  we  had  better  make  a  fair  trial, 
and  see  whether  we  can  execute  it  before  we  give  it  up.  As  I  understand  it, 
there  is  no  great  difficulty  in  executing  the  law  in  the  country,  nor  in  any 
place  outside  the  larger  cities  and  towns.  I  am  not  sure  that  it  cannot  be 
executed  in  those  places.  It  may  not  have  been  executed  entirely  thus  far, 
but  I  think  it  can. 

Q.  From  what  you  see,  do  you  think  there  has  been  any  general  effort  to 
execute  it  ? 

.4.  My  impression  would  be  that  there  had  not  been  any  strenuous  efforts 
made. 

Q.  You  are  familiar-  with  the  merchants  in  the  dry  goods  trade  in  your 
region  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  seems  to  be  the  general  sentiment  among  them  ?  About  how 
are  they  divided  between  the  prohibitory  law  and  the  license  law  ? 

A.  My  impression  would  be,  so  far  as  I  have  heard  anything  said  in 
expression  of  opinion,  that  a  large  majority  were  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory 
law. 

Q.  And  that  is  the  sentiment  of  the  merchants  in  Franklin  Street  and  in 
that  region  ? 

A.     So  far  as  I  have  any  means  of  knowing. 


APPENDIX.  427 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  there  have  been  any  efforts  in  that  region  in  the 
way  of  petitioning  the  Legislature  in  regard  to  this  subject  ? 

A.     I  have  heard  of  a  petition.    I  do  not  know  anything  about  it  personally. 

Q.  You  are  a  member  of  what  is  called  the  orthodox  congregational 
denomination  in  this  city  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  is  the  general  sentiment  of  that  denomination,  ministers  and 
people,  so  far  as  you  know  ? 

A.  So  far  as  I  know,  I  should  say  that  the  general  and  almost  universal 
sentiment  was  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  Have  you  any  general  ideas  upon  this  subject  which  you  would  like  to 
give  ?  If  so,  please  give  them. 

A.  Well,  sir  ;  my  own  impression  is  that  it  would  be  a  step  most  decidedly 
backwards,  to  back  down,  as  I  will  call  it,  from  the  law  at  present  in  exist- 
ence, and  to  adopt  a  license  system.  I  am  a  decided  friend  of  temperance, 
and  a  decided  opponent  of  intemperance.  I  do  not  suppose  that  the  drinking 
of  a  glass  of  wine  or  a  glass  of  liquor,  necessarily,  would  hurt  me  or  you,  but 
I  do  suppose  that  drunkenness  begins  with  temperate  drinking,  and  I  suppose 
Jthat  I  should  take  it  on  the  ground  that  I  have  always  taken,  that,  although 
it  might  not  injure  me,  still  it  does  injure  others ;  and  I  should  act  on  the 
principle  laid  down  by  the  Apostle  Paul, —  "  If  meat  makes  my  brother  to 
offend,  I  will  eat  no  meat  so  long  as  the  world  stands."  I  feel  called  upon  to 
discountenance  the  use  of  liquor,  and  to  use  all  the  influence  I  can  to  prevent 
the  drinking  of  it.  I  am  not  by  any  means  certain  that  this  law  cannot  be 
executed  in  Boston.  I  do  not  think  we  have  had  a  fair  trial  of  it  yet. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  the  results  of  the  proceedings  of  the  State 
Constabulary  indicate  very  strongly  that  it  can  be  enforced  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  should  say  that  the  experiment  was  working  well  so  far, 
and  I  think  we  had  better  give  it  a  thorough  test. 

Q.  You  are  in  the  habit  of  conversing  with  members  of  your  church  and 
others  of  your  faith,  and  I  suppose  you  understand  their  sentiments  pretty 
well? 

A.  I  understand  the  sentiments  pretty  well  of  our  church,  and  I  think  I  do 
pretty  generally  in  the  other  churches. 

Q.  The  plan  proposed  here  to  give  to  the  municipal  authorities  in  the 
cities  and  to  the  town  authorities  liberty  to  license  at  their  discretion,  as  I 
understand  it.  Do  you  think  it  would  be  fair  to  give  Boston  liberty  to  license, 
for  instance,  according  to  that  plan,  giving  licenses  to  grocers,  apotheca- 
ries, hotel-keepers  and  victuallers,  and  the  surrounding  cities  should  be  opposed 
to  license  —  do  you  think  it  would  be  fair  to  these  cities  to  hold  this  temptation 
to  the  young  and  inexperienced  in  them,  to  tempt  them  in  here. 

A*    No,  sir. 

Q.  Or  to  deluge  them  with  jugs  and  bottles  from  Boston,  when  they,  of 
their  own  accord,  would  prohibit  the  sale  ? 

A.    No,  sir.    I  should  be  opposed  to  that. 

Q.     A  great  inequality  and  a  great  injustice  you  would  regard  it  ? 

A.    I  should.  -•  *« 


428  APPENDIX. 

Q.  And  it  would  also  be  unjust  and  unfair  if  Boston  should  prohibit  the  sale, 
and  Charlestovra  should  license  the  sale,  and  thus  tempt  people  over  there  to 
drink? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  have  heard  the  remark  made  frequently  recently,  that 
intemperance  had  increased  within  the  last  few  years ;  and  it  has  frequently 
occurred  to  me  that  one  occasion  for  that,  if  such  is  the  fact  so  far  as  we  are 
concerned  here  in  Boston,  is  that  in  the  great  portion  of  this  State  liquor  is 
not  easily  obtained,  and,  therefore,  if  men  must  drink  and  will  drink  they  will 
come  here  and  purchase  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  McCLELLAN.)  What  is  your  opinion  with  regard  to  the  fact 
whether  it  has  increased  or  not  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  have  had  an  impression  for  the  last  two  or  three  years 
(though  perhaps  not  within  the  last  six  months),  that  there  is  more  intem- 
perance than  there  was  in  years  past ;  and  I  have  accounted  for  it  partly  from 
this  fact,  that  people  come  from  the  country  where  they  cannot  easily  obtain 
liquor,  and  "  let  out "  as  they  say  here. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  men  of  hard  drinking  habits  have  fled  from  the 
country  into  the  city,  because  they  could  more  easily  gratify  their  appetites 
here  V 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  could  say  that  from  observation,  as  I  do  not  come 
in  contact  with  them,  but  I  have  had  a  general  impression  that  there  was 
more  liquor  drank  here  because  it  could  not  be  easily  obtained  in  the  country. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  The  ground  of  your  favoring  any  law  is  with  refer- 
ence to  what  shall  be  most  efficient  in  checking  the  use  of  liquor  and  promoting 
temperance? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  If  it  were  a  fact  that  the  prohibitory  law  in  the  state  of  things  that 
exists  now  was  less  favorable  to  temperance  than  some  other  kind  of  a  law, 
you  would  then  be  in  favor  of  some  other  law,  would  you  not  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  if  that  could  be  thoroughly  proved  to  be  the  fact. 

Q.  The  question,  then,  in  your  mind  is,  whether  this  law  or  any  other  law 
that  might  be  framed  would  be  most  efficient  in  promoting  temperance ;  that 
is  the  whole  question,  is  it  not,  as  it  lies  in  your  mind  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  would  inquire  whether,  in  the  last  few  years,  say  going  back  for  ten 
or  fifteen  years,  and  so  up  to  within  the  last  six  months,  you  have  any  facts 
or  information  as  to  the  increase  of  drinking  usages  in  the  higher  circles  of 
society  over  what  it  used  to  be.  Is  the  use  more  general  among  those  classes 
now  than  formerly  ? 

A.     It  would  be  rather  my  impression  that  it  was,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  this  custom  has  become  somewhat  extensive, 
and  that  these  usages  have  increased  to  an  alarming  extent  among  young 
men? 

A.  If  there  is  an  increase,  it  is  certainly  alarming,  and  it  is  certainly  my 
opinion  that  there  has  been  an  increase. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  execution  of  this  law,  should  you  regard  it  as  an  execu- 
tion that  would  have  any  benefit  upon  the  cause  of  temperance,  to  shut  up  one 
of  these  open  establishments  and  to  have  four  or  five  or  six  put  up  in  its  place 


APPENDIX.  429 

where  there  should  be  as  much  sold  secretly  as  there  had  been  openly  ? 
Would  that  be  a  beneficial  execution  of  the  law,  if  that  were  the  fact  ? 

A.    I  should  not  consider  that  an  execution  of  the  law  at  all. 

Q.  Your  idea  of  the  execution  of  the  law,  is  merely  from  the  reports  that 
you  see  in  the  papers  as  to  how  many  of  these  places  are  closed ;  and  you 
think  it  is  now  being  executed  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  If  it  goes  no  further  than  to  shut  up  one  place,  and  to  have  an  increase 
in  the  sale,  it  would  not  be  any  execution  of  the  law  that  was  of  any  value  ? 

A.     Perhaps  not.    I  should  say  that  that  was  not  an  execution  of  the  law. 

Q.  But  I  understand  that  you  desire  such  legislation  as  will  most  effec- 
tually promote  temperance  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  I  take  that  ground. 

Q.  You  are  not  wedded  to  any  particular  form  of  law,  whether  it  be  a 
prohibitory  law  or  anything  else  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  am  not  wedded  to  an  particular  form. 

Q.  I  would  ask  your  opinion  on  this  point :  Do  you  think  that  any  mere 
law,  without  the  aid  of  moral  means,  will  effectually  suppress  intemperance  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  should  say  that  I  believe  in  moral  means  as  the  strongest 
and  best  means  for  promoting  temperance  ;  but  at  the  same  time,  I  should 
add,  that  I  should  Jaelieve  in  having  the  law  as  an  adjunct  and  assistant. 

Q.  But  you  think  that  moral  means  would  effect  more  in  connection  with 
the  law  than  the  law  would  accomplish  without  moral  means  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  as  I  can  make  a  distinction,  sir. 

Q.  Is  there  any  tendency  in  your  opinion  that  the  punishment  of  an  evil 
works  a  moral  reform  in  the  minds  of  men  ? 

A*    I  do  not  know  exactly  what  you  mean  by  that  question. 

Q.    You  do  not  expect  a  man  could  be  converted  by  Act  of  Parliament  ? 

A.     No,  sir  ;  if  you  mean  a  moral  change. 

Q.  I  mean  a  moral  change  in  the  habit  of  drinking  liquors.  Do  you 
suppose  that  the  law  has  any  tendency  to  produce  this  moral  change  ? 

A.  I  believe  that  the  law  frequently  leads  to  this  result,  from  the  fact  that 
they  cannot  get  the  liquor  ;  and  they  lose  the  habit  and  the  taste.  I  have  no 
doubt  that  many  have  been  reformed  because  they  could  not  get  liquor. 

Q.    Has  there  been  any  time  when  they  could  not  get  it  in  Boston  ? 

A.  My  own  judgment  would  be  that  there  have  been  a  great  many  places 
where  the  law  has  subjected  men  to  so  much  difficulty  in  getting  it,  that  a 
man  would  go  without  it.  • 

Q.     That  depends  upon  the  strength  of  the  appetite,  does  it  not  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  anything  about  the  strength  of  the  appetite. '  Fortu- 
nately, I  never  had  this  appetite,  and  only  know  of  it  from  observation. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONEE.)  I  want  to  know  if  you  would  suppose  there 
could  be  such  a  state  of  things  as  that  the  licensing. of  the  sale  could  suppress 
it  and  the  prohibition  enhance  it  ? 

A.    I  do  not,  sir. 

Q.  The  gentleman  asks,  whether  it  is  any  advantage  to  shut  up  one  shop 
and  have  half  a  dozen  others  spring  up  in  secret  places  in  consequence  ?  I 


430  APPENDIX. 

want  to  know  if  that  is  common  sense,  that  the  support  of  a  law  against  any- 
evil  is  going  to  increase  it  ? 

A .    I  should  not  think  it  was. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  I  understood  you  that  you  would  not  call  the  shut- 
ting up  of  one  place  where  liquors  are  sold,  and  having  two  or  three  other 
places  spring  up  in  its  stead,  an  enforcement  of  the  law  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  would  not  call  that  an  enforcement  of  the  law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  You  are  acquainted  with  the  fact,  of  course,  that  a 
very  large  portion  of  the  community  are  in  the  habit  of  using  more  or  less  of 
wines  and  liquors  as  beverages  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  also  that  a  large  quantity  of  such  articles  are  in  the  State  and 
probably  always  will  be  in  the  State  ? 

A-.    I  do  not  say  that  it  always  will  be ;  I  hope  it  will  not. 

Q.  Taking  the  state  of  things  as  it  is,  do  you  think  there  would  be  a  ten- 
dency for  parties  to  get  the  liquor,  no  matter  what  law  existed  ? 

A.  Certain  parties  might;  but  I  should  go  back  of  that.  I  should  say 
that  the  whole  community  were  not  in  favor  of  drinking,  either  theoretically 
or  practically ;  and  I  expect  the  time  will  come  when  there  will  be  a  very 
small  part  of  the  community  that  will  either  drink  or  favor  drinking. 

Q.     Taking  the  present  state  of  things,  how  is  it  ? 

A.  As  things  stand  to-day,  I  should  not  say  that  a  large  part  of  the 
community,  even  here  in  Boston,  drink. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  a  majority  of  the  community  in  Boston  act  on  the 
principle  of  total  abstinence  ? 

A.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  I  should  say  that  probably  a  majority  do  not 
drink.  I  do  not  say  whether  they  do  not  do  it  from  mere  principle,  or  what 
the  motive  is.  I  am  aware  that  in  certain  classes  wine  is  drank  ;  but  when 
you  come  to  the  masses  of  the  people,  or  when  you  come  into  our^congre- 
gation,  for  instance,  I  do  not  think  that  you  will  find  one  in  ten  that  drinks  at 
all. 

Q.  Do  you  not  suppose  that  the  larger  proportion  of  persons  would  find 
means  of  getting  liquor,  the  state  of  things  being  as  they  are.  now,  there 
existing  a  taste  for  liquor  in  the  community,  and  the  liquor  itself  being  here  ? 

A .    I  do  not  know,  sir,  as  to  the  liquor  being  here  as  a  supposition. 

Q.  That  is  something  which  you  cannot  prevent,  can  you  ?  You  cannot 
prevent  the  liquor  from  being  imported,  can  you  ? 

A .     Congress  might  make  a  law. 

Q.    Not  as  the  law  stands  to-day,  you  cannot  prevent  it,  can  you  ? 

A.     As  the  law  stands  to-day  it  can  be  imported. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  Have  you  in  your  observation,  had  any  means  of 
judging  whether  the  Germans,  as  a  population,  were  more  addicted  to 
intemperance  than  the  Irish  ? 

A.    I  presume  they  are  less  addicted  to  it,  as  far  as  my  observation  extends, 

Q.  I  want  to  ask  whether  or  not,  the  Germans,  being  a  beer-drinking  class 
of  society,  are  not,  on  the  whole,  less  addicted  to  intemperance  than  the 
Irish  who  are  more  in  the  habit  of  drinking  distilled  liquors  ? 


APPENDIX.  431 

A.  I  have  not  really  very  much  means  of  knowing.  I  do  not  come  in  con- 
tact with  the  Germans  as  much  as  with  the  Irish.  My  general  impression 
would  be  that  there  was  more  intemperance  among  the  Irish. 

Q.  I  would  ask,  whether  or  not,  if  some  plan  could  be  adopted  whereby 
the  drinking  and  sale  of  malt  liquors  should  be  made  free,  you  would  not 
arrive  at  the  same  state  of  things  among  the  Irish  as  among  the  Germans  ? 

A.  I  should  say  in  reply  to  that,  that  my  observation  abroad  would  not 
favor  that  idea.  I  was  abroad  a  few  years  ago  and  spent  a  good  deal  of  time 
in  Manchester  and  other  towns  where  they  drank  a  good  deal  of  beer,  and  I 
think  it  is  as  immoral  and  as  injurious  a  kind  of  drinking  as  there  can  be. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  N.  E.  COBLEIGH. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  give  your  residence 
and  occupation,  and  the  denomination  to  which  you  belong  ? 

A.  I  reside  in  Boston ;  am  editor  of  "  Zion's  Herald/'  and  belong  to  the 
Methodist  denomination. 

Q.  Have  you  given  any  special  thought  to  the  various  measures  for  the 
suppression  of  intemperance  ? 

A.    I  have,  sir. 

Q.     For  how  long  a  period  ? 

A.     Fifteen  or  twenty  years. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  in  your  own  way  what  opinions  you 
entertain  and  the  reasons  therefor  ? 

A.  I  reached  the  conclusion  many  years  ago  that  the  only  way  of  sup- 
pressing intemperance  was  by  prohibitory  laws,  based  on  the  principle  not 
simply  of  greater  efficiency,  but  on  the  ground  of  the  prohibition  of  the  evil. 
As  I  consider  both  the  sale  and  use  of  liquors  as  a  beverage  to  be  an  evil,  I 
think  that  the  evil  should  be  prohibited  and  not  regulated  by  license. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  in  your  experience  during  the  years  that  we  have 
had  a  prohibitory  law  on  our  statute  books,  that  would  shake  your  confidence  ? 

A.  Not  at  all.  The  law  has  not  as  yet  had  a  fair  opportunity.  It  has 
been  embarrassed  in  the  courts,  and  it  has  been  embarrassed  in  the  jury  box, 
and  in  a  variety  of  ways ;  and  when  that  embarrassment  is  removed,  I  see  no 
difficulty  in  removing  it  as  well  as  other  evils. 

Q.  What  has  been  your  opinion  as  to  the  measures  taken  in  Boston  for 
the  suppression  of  the  sale  ? 

A.  I  have  understood  from  the  public  testimony  of  some  of  the  officials 
who  have  been  present  here,  that  they  had  not  tried  to  enforce  the  law  in 
Boston ;  assuming  that  they  did  desire  to  have  it  enforced. 

Q.     Do  you  consider  it  a  fact  that  they  did  not  desire  to  have  it  enforced  ? 
A.    I  have  not  heard  any  expression  in  regard  to  that  matter  as  to  whether 
they  desired  to  enforce  it  or  not. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  of  a  license  law  such  as  has  been  proposed  here, 
or  of  any  license  law  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  understand  that  the  license  system  for  the  last  two  hundred 
years  has  never  been  enforced  in  any  place  effectually ;  and  that  they  have 
very  much  the  same  difficulties  in  procuring  convictions  under  the  license 
laws  as  under  the  prohibitory  law.  I  have  heard  legal  gentlemen  so  state 


432  APPENDIX. 

•who  have  been  connected  with  courts  for  a  score  or  more  of  years.  They 
have  said  that  the  same  difficulty  will  attend  the  enforcement  of  the  license 
system  as  has  attended  the  prohibitory  system. 

Q.  Have  you  reason  to  believe  that  there  is  more  perjury  and  false  testi- 
mony on  the  part  of  witnesses  and  jurors  now  than  under  the  existence  of  the 
license  laws  ? 

A.  I  have  na  knowledge  of  the  matter  of  perjury  under  either.  My 
business  has,  of  course,  led  me  out.  of  the  courts,  and  I  know  nothing  except  a 
general  impression  gathered  up  from  observation. 

Q»  Do  you  see  any  reason  from  general  observation  why  men  should  per- 
jure themselves  under  the  prohibitory  law  any  more  than  they  would  under  a 
license  law,  provided  that  the  license  law  were  made  to  operate  as  a  restraint  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  the  reason  why  persons  are  led  to  perjure  themselves  is 
that  they  desire  to  secure  some  interest  to  themselves ;  but  I  do  not  suppose 
that  the  prohibitory  law  or  license  law  would  change  the  interest  that  they 
would  have  on  the  subject. 

Q.  Have  you  observed  the  operation  of  the  law  in  other  cities  than 
Boston  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  look  upon  the  subject  as  so  changed  in  its  character  by  the 
different  circumstances  of  the  towns  or  cities  as  to  require  a  different 
administration  and  a  different  system  of  measures  ? 

A.  No  essential  difference  in  the  main  principle.  There  might  be  some 
little  difference  in  the  details. 

Q.    What  are  the  general  opinions  of  your  church  upon  this  subject  ? 

A .  Well,  sir,  so  far  as  I  know,  they  are  almost  entirely  on  one  side,  and 
that  is  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  system. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  fact  if  a  clergyman  in  your  church  were  known  to 
be  what  we  commonly  call  a  temperate  drinker  ? 

A.    I  doubt  whether  he  would  remain  in  the  church  very  long. 

Q.     Your  churches  universally  would  reject  such  a  man  ? 

A.  Our  church  is  in  theory,  and  I  judge  most  universally  in  practice,  in 
favor  of  total  abstinence. 

Q.     Have  you  anything  in  your  church  articles  that  demands  that  ? 

A .    We  have  in  our  rules. 

Q.    In  your  discipline,  you  mean  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    You  require  your  members,  as  well  as  your  clergymen,  to  be  abstainers  ? 

A.     We  have  had  a  general  rule  to  that  effect. 

Q.  The  theory  of  your  church  government  assumes,  that  the  use  of  liquors 
habitually  is  good  ground  for  discipline  ? 

A.  That  is  the  public  opinion  so  far  as  I  am  acquainted  with  the  church. 
I  have  known  of  some  cases  where  individuals  have  been  supposed  to  use 
ardent  spirits  occasionally,  and  they  have  been  generally  waited  upon  by 
committees,  and  the  thing  has  been  brought  to  an  issue. 

Q.  There  was  a  gentleman  who  testified  the  other  day,  who  ranks  in  your 
denomination  in  regular  standing.  I  refer  to  Mr.  Jones  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  such  a  gentleman,  sir. 


APPENDIX.  433 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  with  regard  to  the  practical  working  of  a  license 
system  that  should  give  extended  license  to  the  sale  of  liquors  ?  What  would 
be  the  influence  upon  the  peace  and  order  and  morality  of  the  community  ? 

A.  My  idea  of  impartiality  would  lead  me  to  decide  against  any  such 
system.  What  would  be  applicable  to  one  should  be  applicable  to  all. 

Q.  Dp  you  think  that  the  people  in  the  laboring  cities  could  have  a  fair 
discrimination  ? 

A.     I  think  it  would  be  impossible  in  laboring  cities. 

Q.     Do  you  think  it  possible  as  regards  the  rights  of  persons  ? 

A.  So  far  as  a  license  should  restrain,  it  would  interfere  with  the  rights  of 
persons,  the  same  as  under  the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  And  if  it  is  made,  what  the  gentlemen  talk  about  here,  a  stringent 
license  law — that  is,  if  it  had  any  effect  at  all  in  restraining  the  traffic  and  use 
of  liquor — would  it  involve  the  same  principles  ? 

A.  So  far  as  it  restrained,  it  would  involve  all  the  objections  and  all  the 
difficulties. 

Q.  Do  you  have  any  difficulty  in  the  Bible  as  to  maintaining  the  views 
you  have  here  expressed  ? 

A.     I  think  that  I  derive  my  conviction  on  the  subject  from  the  Bible. 

Q.  You  do  not  think  that  you  are  commanded  by  any  divine  authority  to 
perpetuate  the  drinking  habits  and  usages  of  society  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  there  is  any  justification  offered  in  Scripture,  when  it  is 
properly  interpreted,  to  favor  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors.  Wherever 
there  is  the  seeming  favoring  of  it,  it  is  in  reference  to  an  article  that  was  not 
intoxicating. 

Q.     That  is  well  understood  by  commentators  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  I  think  it  is  ;  not  only  in  the  Scriptures,  but  history  comes 
in  to  confirm  it. 

Q.  What  do  you  regard  as  true  temperance  in  the  use  of  intoxicating 
liquors  as  beverages  ? 

A.  I  regard,  in  the  first  place,  that  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a 
beverage,  is  an  evil  and  that  continually ;  and  that  the  only  ground  on  Scrip- 
tul e  doctrine,  in  regard  to  that,  is  that  of  total  abstinence  and  perpetual 
abstinence. 

Q.  From  what  point  do  you  set  out  in  that  respect?  Do  you  believe  that 
the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages,  simply  as  beverages,  are  disturbers  in  the 
physical  economy  of  a  person  in  health  ? 

A .  I  understand  that  alcohol  is  a  principle  that  can  never  be  used  in  the 
human  system  for  any  purpose  whatever  but  as  a  disturber.  I  understand  that 
the  highest  scientific  judgment  in  Europe,  within  the  last  twenty  years,  has 
decided  the  question  that  alcohol,  in  no  case,  is  ever  assimilated  in  the  system. 

Q.  And  so  you  regard  all  self-treatment  which  is  injurious  to  one's  self, 
intellectually,  physically  and  morally,  as  so  far  wrong  and  even  sinful  ? 

A.     I  do,  sir. 

Q,  What  would  you  say,  looking  at  the  matter  in  a  social  point  of  view, 
even  though  an  individual  might  use  it  with  impunity  ? 

A.  I  should  take  another  view  on  that  subject,  that,  even  though  it  is 
possible  for  certain  individuals  to  use  it,  yet,  under  their  Christian  duties,  they 
55 


434  APPENDIX. 

should  abstain,  inasmuch  as  we  are  exhorted  by  the  apostle  to  abstain  from 
all  appearance  of  evil. 

Q.     How  is  it  as  to  the  use  of  alcohol  ? 

A.  1  think  that  it  creates  a  morbid  appetite  which  has  a  tendency  to 
increase  constantly. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  a  Christian  man,  aware  of  that  fact,  can  lend  his 
influence  innocently  in  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  simply  as  beverages  ? 

A.  If  you  were  to  ask  the  questfon  whether  I  could,  as  a  Christian  man,  I 
Mould  answer  in  the  negative  at  once.  I  should  not  feel  at  liberty  to  judge 
for  all  others. 

Q.  Should  you  feel  that  there  was  any  principle  involved  in  your  opinion, 
from  the  class  of  theological  questions  which  you  might  have  in  your  family, 
that  would  not  also  apply  to  your  opinions  as  a  clergyman  ? 

A.    I  consider  that  the  principle  applies  the  same  in  either  case  ? 

Q.     Have  you  resided  in  the  West  ? 

A.     I  have,  sir. 

Q.    For  what  term  of  years  ? 

A.     Ten  years. 

Q.  What  was  your  observation  there  as  to  the  state  of  temperance  as 
compared  with  New  England  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  there  is  a  very  little  difference,  except,  perhaps,  in  the- 
nature  of  the  beverage  that  they  drink.  They  drink  more  bad  whiskey  there 
than  we  do  here. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  seen  any  contrast  between  the  States  where  the  traffic 
was  licensed  and  where  it  was  prohibited,  which  seemed  to  make  against 
prohibition  ? 

A.  In  reference  to  the  different  States,  I  do  not  know  that  I  ever  had  any 
special  observation,  but  when  I  was  in  the  State  of  Illinois,  the  law  that  was 
in  operation  in  the  State  at  that  time  was,  that  the  towns  should  have  liberty 
to  say  whether  they  would  or  would  not  license  the  sale  of  ardent  spirits,  and 
many  of  the  towns  would  not  license  at  all,  but  enforced  in  reality  the  pro- 
hibitory law  or  the  principle  of  prohibition.  I  think  that  is  the  state  of 
things  in  Illinois  at  the  present  time  in  many  of  the  towns. 

Q.     Was  that  law  so  executed  as  to  suppress  the  traffic  ? 

A.     That  law  was  so  executed  that  nobody  could  obtain  any  liquor  openly. 

Q.  How  did  these  towns  compare  with  those  where  licenses  were 
granted  ? 

A .  They  compared  favorably,  in  that  respectable  people  preferred  these 
towns  to  reside  in ;  and  it  had  the  effect  to  draw  certain  classes  of  inhabitants 
and  a  certain  class  of  business,  while  it  excluded  and  sent  to  other  towns  an 
element  that  was  not  desirable.  The  price  of  real  estate  was  generally 
higher. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)     Higher  where  ? 

A.     Where  the  prohibitory  principle  was  enforced. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  In  the  towns  where  licenses  were  granted,  were 
there  or  were  there  not  other  persons  selling  without  license  ? 

A.  Nearly  everybody  sold  in  those  towns  where  there  was  no  prohibition  ; 
whether  they  were  licensed  or  not,  I  do  not  know. 


APPENDIX.  435 

Q.  What  would  be  the  relative  difficulty  of  executing  the  license  law, 
whatever  might  be  its  condition,  in  towns  where  the  sale  of  liquor  was  not 
prohibited  by  the  refusal  of  the  license  ? 

A.  If  a  majority  of  the  people  in  the  State  preferred  prohibition,  outright, 
I  think  they  would  have  no  more  difficulty  in  executing  that  than  they  would 
on  the  other  principle.  I  think  there  would  be  less  complication  because  it 
would  be  a  general  principle  everywhere. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  In  these  towns  in  Illinois  where  the  licenses  were 
not  allowed  by  the  authorities,  how  did  the  state  of  temperance  compare  with 
the  state  of  temperance  in  our  towns  where  the  law  is  enforced  ? 

A.  I  have  but  little  knowledge  of  the  condition  of  things  in  our  towns 
here.  The  temperance  movement  was  very  active  in  the  State  of  Illinois  at 
the  time  I  was  there. 

Q.  In  the  towns  where  there  were  no  licenses  allowed,  was  there  substan- 
tial intemperance  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  and  it  was  on  account  of  the  principle  of  temperance  that 
they  prohibited  the  sale. 

Q.  If  I  understand  you,  the  sale  might  be  licensed  at  the  option  of  the 
town? 

A .     That  was  the  condition  of  things  several  years  ago. 

Q.  And  in  these  towns  was  there  substantial  temperance  ?  Might  you 
not  reasonably  have  such  a  state  of  things  in  Massachusetts  ? 

A.  We  might,  unless  there  was  some  place  like  the  city  of  Boston,  where 
an  over-mastering  influence  swept  through  the  country  to  prevent.  There 
was  no  such  concentration  of  capital  there  as  there  is  here. 

Q.  A  license  system  might  be  engrafted  upon  this  law,  leaving  it  optional 
with  towns  to  permit  or  not  permit  the  sale,  might  it  not,  if  we  had  not  such 
an  over-bearing  influence  as  there  is  in  Boston,  and  if  we  had  the  same  state 
of  things  in  the  country  as  there  is  now  ? 

A.  I  should  not  select  such  a  state  of  things  as  they  had  in  Illinois  at  that 
time. 

Q.  Then  you  would  have  it  arranged  so  that  nobody  should  have  it  in  those 
towns  where  licensing  was  prohibited  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  as  a  beverage.     I  should  hope  there  would  nobody  have  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  think  it  would  be  well  in  the  city,  where 
the  large  majority  of  the  population  were  foreigners,  to  throw  the  machine, 
under  such  an  arrangement,  into  the  hands  of  foreigners  ? 

A.    I  should  think  that  was  far  from  desirable. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  is  fair  to  hazard  the  results  in  one  town  where  the  sale 
of  liquor  is  not  licensed,  by  Jiaving  other  towns  around  it  that  do  have 
licenses  ? 

A.  I  just  now  said  that  I  should  not  select  such  a  state  of  things.  I  take 
the  broader  principle  of  prohibition  throughout. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Most  of  the  questions  put  to  you  are  questions 
concerning  dietetics  and  concerning  science.  Am  I  to  understand  that  you 
regard  yourself  as  an  expert  in  dietetics  ? 

Q.  (By  Mr.  COBLEIGH.)  I  would  like  to  have  you  explain  what  you 
mean  by  the  term  expert. 


436  APPENDIX. 

A.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  A  person  who  by  reason  of  peculiar  studies  has 
fitted  himself  so  as  to  be  able  to  give  a  better  opinion  upon  any  subject  than 
other  people  who  have  not ;  for  instance,  a  doctor  of  medicine  is  regarded 
as  a  person  well  fitted  to  express  opinions  on  medical  questions;  an  engineer 
upon  questions  of  bridge-building,  road-making,  etc.  Now,  upon  the  question 
of  dietetics  or  natural  science,  do  you  consider  yourself  an  expert  ? 

A.  I  have  not  a  chemical  knowledge  sufficient  to  explain  the  operation 
of  alcohol  upon  the  human  system  ;  but  I  have  read  the  writings  of  some  of 
the  most  eminent  physiologists,  and  have  reached  my  opinions  from  that 
source. 

Q.  Therefore  you  do  not  hold  yourself  out  as  an  expert,  any  further  than 
any  other  well-read  gentleman  may  do  ? 

A.    I  do  not  make  any  special  pretension  upon  any  of  those  things. 

Q.  You  have  given  various  opinions  upon  moral  questions  and  religious 
questions.  You  spoke  from  your  point  of  view  as  a  minister  of  the  Methodist 
denomination,  did  you  not  ? 

A.    I  did. 

Q.  Is  there  an  article  in  the  creed  of  your  denomination  in  reference  to 
this  subject  of  the  use  of  liquor  ? 

A.  There  is  no  article  in  the  creed.  There  is  a  rule  among  what  we  call 
general  rules,  prohibiting  the  use  as  a  beverage  of  intoxicating  liquor. 

Q.    Do  you  recollect  the  phraseology  of  that  rule  ? 

A.     I  do  not,  sir. 

Q.    By  whom  was  it  made  ? 

A.     By  Wesley. 

Q.     So  that  there  has  been  no  new  rule  since  the  days  of  John  Wesley  ? 

A.  There  has  been  no  new  rule.  The  language  may  have  been  modified, 
but  I  am  not  certain. 

Q.     To  what  extent  is  that  rule  of  Wesley  made  binding  ? 

A.  That  rule  goes  to  this  extent :  that  the  person  who  is  entitled  to  mem- 
bership in  the  society  must  abstain  from  certain  things  and  from  doing  certain 
things  ;  and  this  is  one  of  those  from  which  he  is  to  abstain  ;  and  the  opinion 
upon  that  point  in  this  country  has  been  almost  universal,  so  far  as  I  know. 

Q.     Confine  yourself  to  the  rule  and  the  execution  of  the  rule. 

A.  The  rule  would  be  executed  very  much  according  to  circumstances. 
It  is  not  an  iron  rule  that  executes  itself. 

Q.  Is  it  not  true  that  a  member  of  the  Methodist  Church  must  keep  the 
commandments  of  God  as  they  are  declared  to  men  in  what  we  call  revealed 
religion  ? 

A.    I  should  think  he  ought  to  do  it. 

Q.     Does  not  the  discipline  require  it  ? 

A.     The  discipline  does  require  it,  as  it  does  in  all  other  churches. 

Q.  If  a  man  should  break  one  of  the  ten  commandments,  that  would  be  a 
ground  for  disciplinary  action  by  the  church,  would  it  not  ? 

A.    It  would,  if  it  could  be  found  out  to  be  true. 

Q.  Has  the  church  added  any  new  commandments  to  those  positively 
written  in  the  Bible  ? 

A.    I  have  not  heard  of  any. 


APPENDIX.  437 

Q.  Is  it  recognized  by  anything  in  the  discipline  of  the  church,  as  a  breach 
of  the  commandments  of  the  church  as  revealed  in  the  Bible,  that  a  person 
should  moderately  and  temperately  drink  spirits  and  wine  ? 

A.    If  they  use  them  as  medicines,  there  is  not. 

Q.  Suppose  a  question  should  arise  between  one  brother  of  a  church  and 
another  as  to  whether  that  other,  in  drinking  or  giving  a  glass  of  wine,  drank 
as  medicine,  or  by  prescription,  or  as  a  beverage,  thinking  it  would  do  him 
good — is  that  a  question  of  which  your  church  would  take  recognition,  and 
is  the  person  who  does  this  liable  to  be  disciplined  and  expelled  from  the 
church  ? 

A.  As  I  said  before,  that  depends  altogether  upon  the  state  of  the  church. 
If  they  choose  to  proceed  they  may  do  so. 

Q.  I  am  supposing  that  the  church  does  right,  and  obeys  the  law  of  its 
own  constitution  ? 

A.     I  do  not  understand  your  question. 

Q.  My  question  is  this  simply :  Does  the  law  of  the  Methodist  Church 
expose  a  brother  to  discipline  and  expulsion  from  the  church  for  drinking  a 
glass  of  distilled  -liquor  or  wine,  unless  it  was  apparent  that  he  did  it  by 
prescription  of  a  physician  ? 

A.     If  he  drank  but  a  single  glass  we  should  bear  with  him  for  a  while. 

Q.     What  does  the  law  of  the  church  say  ? 

A-  The  law  of  the  church  does  not  specify  all  these  things,  except  in 
general,  if  they  are  found  to  do  anything  which  would  exclude  them  from  the 
kingdom  of  grace  and  of  glory. 

Q.  Is  that  sufficient  to  exclude  a  man  from  the  kingdom  of  grace  and  of 
glory  ? 

A.  You  do  not  expect  me  to  decide  that.  I  suppose  that  the  church 
leaves  that  very  much  for  the  common  sense  of  the  people  to  determine.  If 
the  committee  thought  so,  they  would  be  in  duty  bound  to  expel  him. 

Q.  You  can  imagine  a  case  where  a  man  ought  not  to  be  excluded  who 
would  not  be  excluded  from  the  kingdom  of  grace  and  glory  ? 

A.     Certainly  ;  I  can  imagine  such  a  case. 

Q.     Then  there  is  no  binding  rule,  is  there  ? 

A.  There  is  no  specific  rule  to  that  effect.  There  is.  a  rule,  however, 
sufficiently  specific ;  so  that  if  certain  facts  are  brought  out  specifically,  those 
sitting  upon  the  matter  could  discipline  him. 

Q.  Then  it  is  a  matter  of  good  judgment  on  the  part  of  the  committee 
who  try  the  case  ? 

A.    It  necessarily  must  be  on  those  points  not  specifically  determined. 

Q.  The  fact,  then,  is  like  the  fact  that  a  blow  sufficient  to  cause  death  is  a 
cause  for  murder  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  The  discipline  of  the  church  being  such  as  it  is,  are  you  prepared  to 
advise  that  the  government  of  this  world  should  be  more  positive  and  more 
exact  in  their  legislation  ? 

A.     I  do  not  understand  your  question. 

Q.  Then  I  would  not  trouble  you  to  answer  it.  We  have  thus  far  been 
considering  the  discipline  of  the  church.  The  thing  that  the  Committee  have 


438  APPENDIX. 

under  consideration  is  the  discipline  of  the  State  and  not  of  the  church ;  and 
the  great  question  which  addresses  itself  to  the  consideration  of  the  Committee 
is,  What  shall  be  done  by  this  Legislature  in  the  exercise  of  its  law-making 
power,  for  the  government  of  the  people  of  this  world,  in  the  matters  of  this 
world.  Now,  that  being  so,  I  would  like  to  call  your  attention  to  the  answer 
made  in  the  beginning  of  your  examination,  in  which  you  expressed  the 
opinion  that  the  sale  and  use  of  alcoholic  liquors,  as  beverages,  is  an  evil,  and 
is  therefore  to  be  prohibited  as  not -legal  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now  when  you  uttered  that  word,  did  you  mean  that  the  sale  of  liquors 
as  a  beverage,  and  that' their  use  as  a  beverage,  should  be  prohibited  ? 

A.     I  should  put  the  two  in  one  proposition  and  blend  them  together. 

Q.     That  is  to  say,  you  regard  the  sale  of  liquors  to  be  an  evil,  as  a 
beverage,  or  otherwise  ? 
'  A.     No,  sir  ;  I  mean  simply  as  a  beverage. 

Q.     And  the  use  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.     And  the  use  as  a  beverage. 

Q.     Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  what  you  mean  by  beverage  ? 

A.     Drinking  for  any  other  than  medicinal  purposes. 

Q.     Within  what  range  will  you  confine  medicinal  purposes  ? 

A.     Prescriptions  of  a  physician. 

Q.  Then  you  think  no  person  ought  to  be  allowed  to  drink  anything  that 
contains  alcohol  except  by  the  prescription  of  a  physician  ? 

A.     I  should  think  nothing  more  than  in  other  business. 

Q.  That  is  a  comparative  and  not  a  positive  answer.  Do  you  think  the 
law  ought  to  forbid  any  person  to  drink  any  liquor  into  which  alcohol  has 
entered  as  a  constituent,  unless  by  a  prescription  of  a  physician  ? 

A.  I  think  if  we  cut  off  the  tree  at  the  roots  it  will  die,  and  we  shall  not 
have  to  cut  off  the  branches  :  and  if  we  prohibit  the  sale  we  should  not  have 
to  prohibit  the  use.  The  use  is  the  moral  side  and  the  sale  is  the  civil  side  : 
hence  I  think  the  Legislature  may  legislate  on  the  sale  and  traffic,  while  the 
pulpit  had  better  legislate  upon  the  use  as  a  beverage. 

Q.     Then  you  would  confine  yourself  to  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.    I  think  I  would  confine  myself  to  the  prohibition  of  the  illegal  traffic. 

Q.     Simply  ? 

A.     Simply. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  vendor  is  competent  to  hold  the  vendee  responsible 
for  the  use  which  he  makes  of  the  liquor  which  is  sold  to  him  ? 

A .    If  the  sale  is  according  to  law  lie  would  not  be. 

Q.  But  do  you  suppose  that  the  law  is  competent  to  do  so  ?  Can  the  law 
make  the  vendor  responsible  for  what  the  vendee  shall  do  after  he  has  got 
the  article  ? 

A.     I  do  not  see  any  relative  point  to  the  question. 

Q.  The  law  authorizes  the  sale  of  wine  for  sacramental  purposes  by 
every  body  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Therefore  you  or  I  may  set  up  an  establishment  for  the  sale  of  sacra- 
mental wine  ? 


APPENDIX.  439 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  law  authorizes  the  agents  of  the  towns  to  sell  for  certain  specific 
purposes.  Now,  supposing  any  person  comes  to  you  or  me  with  a  false  pre- 
tense, and  we  sell  a  gallon  of  wine.  Should  we  be  responsible  for  the  misuse 
thereafterwards  made,  if  it  was  misused  ? 

A.  If  I  am  allowed  to  answer  my  question  by  a  supposition,  I  should  do  it 
in  this  way :  that  I  would  not  have  any  alcoholic  wines  used  for  the  sacra- 
ment. I  am  not  sufficiently  versed  in  the  science  of  legislation  to  give  a  very 
expert  answer  to  that  question. 

Q.  But  then  you  have  given  different  answers  to  various  questions,  and 
answered  them  very  intelligently.  Now  I  ask  you  the  question,  if  the  sale  oi 
liquor  is  immoral,  and  the  law  permits  you  or  me  to  make  a  sale,  are  we  respon- 
sible for  the  abuse,  or  the  misuse,  or  the  use  of  the  article  after  the  sale  ? 

A.  I  should  think  that  question  would  depend  a  great  deal  upon  the 
circumstances  under  which  the  sale  was  made. 

Q.  Then  if  you  do  not  think  proper  to  answer  the  question  directly,  we 
will  go  back  to  the  other  branch  of  the  inquiry.  You  recognize,  it  seems, 
certain  legitimate  and  rightful  uses  of  these  things,  which  must  sometimes  be 
drank ;  you  recognize  the  fact  that  there  is  an  appetite  and  desire  to  use 
these  things  for  purposes  which  you  do  not  regard  as  directly  medicinal,  do 
you  not  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  large  is  that,  do  you  suppose  ;  taking  society  as  its  exists,  what 
proportion  of  mankind  now  living  in  Massachusetts,  at  some  time  of  their 
lives,  find  occasion  for  their  use  ? 

Q.     (By  Mr.  COBLEIGH.)     Medicinal  use  ? 

A.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)    Not  necessarily  medicinal. 

A.  I  have  no  means  of  determining.  I  have  formed  no  opinion  on  that 
question. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  of  the  quantity  of  distilled  spirits  now  annually 
produced  in  this  country  ? 

A.    I  have  only  an  indefinite  idea  that  it  is  very  large. 

Q.     Can  you  not  come  any  nearer  than  that  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  not  now. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  of  the  production  of  fermented  liquor  in  this 
country  ? 

A.  I  have  not  the  figures.  I  have  an  idea  that  there  is  a  large  quantity 
produced. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  ninety-three  millions  of  fermented  liquors  are 
produced  in  the  country  annually  ? 

A.  I  have  the  figures  and  have  filed  them  away ;  but  I  have  not  got  them 
in  mind  now. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  if  one-half  of  the  amount  annually  produced  in 
this  country  were  drank,  it  would  make  about  a  gallon  and  a  half  for  every 
man  and  woman  in  this  country?  That  would  testify  to  a  very  large 
demand,  would  it  not  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  it  would. 


440  APPENDIX. 

Q.  When  you  consider  this  very  large  demand,  which  is,  a  portion  of  it, 
a  legitimate  demand,  although  a  portion  of  it  is  as  you  consider  an  improper 
demand ;  and  when  you  consider  the  vast  amount  of  property  (for  the  law 
makes  it  so  when  it  is  thus  invested),  and  the  great  bulk  of  material  which  is 
seeking  a  purchaser,  would  you  think  that,  if  you  were  sitting  here  as  a  legis- 
tor,  it  would  be  physically  possible,  or  morally  possible  to  prevent  the 
producer  and  the  consumer,  with  the  articles  in  hand,  in  some  way  or  other 
from  finding  each  other  ? 

A.     I  think  it  would  be  possible  to  prevent  the  legitimate  transfer. 

Q.     Do  you  think  it  would  be  possible  to  prevent  the  actual  transfer  ? 

A.     It  might  not  prevent  it  entirely ;  probably  it  would  not. 

Q.  Then  you  do  not  think  that  it  is  practically  possible  to  prevent  and 
prohibit  people  from  making,  people  from  selling,  people  from  buying  and 
people  from  drinking  these  things  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  it  is  not  possible  to  prevent  murder  and  licentiousness,  and 
those  other  crimes,  and  of  course  we  cannot  prevent  this  entirely. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  you  can  very  largely  abridge  it  by  prohibition  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  I  think  we  can. 

Q.  Havo  you  ever  known  it  to  be  done  on  earth,  by  any  government  on 
earth? 

A.     I  have  known  it  to  be  to  some  extent. 

Q.     You  have  known  it  to  be  apparently  and  openly  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  it  to  be  done  successfully,  so  that  people  are  not 
obliged  to  resort  to  places  where  liquor  is  not  sold  openly  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  but  virtue  is  not  responsible  for  all  the  vice  that  is  done  in 
the  dark.  I  would  act  in  this  just  as  I  do  in  regard  to  gambling  and  licensing 
houses  of  ill-fame.  The  rule  would  apply  in  both  cases  exactly  alike.  You 
cannot  entirely  prohibit  them,  and  I  think  the  same  principle  underlies 
them  all. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  laws  are  made  for  the  punishment  of  sin  ?  Are 
they  not  made  for  the  peace  and  order  and  decorum  of  society  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;  and  so  I  consider  a  law  of  this  kind. 

Q.  Do  you  regard  a  law  which  prohibits  the  sale  of  liquors  entirely  as 
more  conducive  to  the  peace,  order,  and  decorum  of  society  ? 

A.     And  prosperity.     These  things  include  prosperity. 

Q.  Are  you  not  introducing  a  very  large  word  when  you  say  the  "  pros- 
perity ?  " 

A.  Yes,  sir,  a  very  large  word.  I  think  they  probably  have  that  idea  in 
their  legislation  upon  that  question. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  that  law  affords  a  basis  of  legislative  action  ? 

A.  When  it  is  combined  with  as  palpable  evils  as  are  connected  with  the 
use  of  ardent  spirits. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  it  would  even  come  to  that  ?  Is  it  not  your  opinion 
that  it  would  be  better  if  everybody  believed  in  the  doctrines  and  discipline 
of  the  Methodist  Church  ? 

A.     No,  sir,  I  do  not  think  it  would. 

Q.    Do  you  not  advocate  that  ? 


APPENDIX.  441 

A.  I  do  not  think  there  would  be  but  little  variety.  I  think  it  is  necessary 
to  have  some  people  getting  one  side  of  the  truth  and  the  others  some  other, 
inasmuch  as  we  cannot  get  the  whole  of  it. 

Q.     Which  Conference  do  you  belong  to  ? 

A.     The  New  England  Conference. 

Q.  Is  it  not  true  that  every  minister  belonging  to  the  Conference  is  con 
sidered  annually  by  the  Conference  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  that  a  gentleman  belonging  to  the  Conference,  who  has  not  been 
disciplined  in  any  way,  is  therefore  in  good  and  regular  standing  ? 

A.  His  character  is  brought  up  for  consideration,  and  if  nothing  is  brought 
up  against  him,  he  is  considered  in  good  and  regular  standing.  Every  minis- 
ter's name  is  called,  and  it  is  asked  if  there  is  anything  against  him. 

Q.  I  understand  you  to  say  that  during  the  past  fifteen  years  the  law  has 
not  been  enforced  in  Boston  ? 

A.     It  has  not  been  enforced  to  any  great  extent  until  quite  recently. 

Q.     What  do  you  call  enforcing  the  law  ? 

A.     Bringing  it  down  upon  the  individual  that  is  guilty. 

Q.  Do  you  regard  enforcing  the  law,  by  executing  it  upon  individual  men, 
without  success  in  accomplishing  the  end  of  the  law,  anything  more  than  a 
formal  execution  ? 

A.  The  same  execution  that  we  have  in  any  case  where  the  law  prescribes 
a  penalty  upon  the  guilty.  I  consider  it  enforced  so  far. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  the  Legislature  makes  laws  for  the  fun  of  it,  in 
order  to  see  how  many  men  it  can  bring  within  its  meshes  and  punish  ? 

A.     I  should  hope  not,  sir. 

Q.  So  far,  then,  those  laws  which  are  substantially  and  really  executed 
are  the  laws  that  prevent  the  most  of  those  who  are  evilly  disposed  from  doing 
wrong,  and  actually  punishes  those  who  do  in  fact  disobey  ? 

A.     I  suppose  that  is  the  design  of  the  law. 

Q.  Now,  supposing  that  you  have  a  law  of  such  a  character  that,  in  a 
community  of  from  one  hundred  and  fifty  to  two  hundred  thousand  people, 
where  they  have  annual  elections  of  the  municipal  officers  and  magistrates, 
these  officers  and  magistrates  themselves  annually  chosen  for  fifteen  consecu- 
tive years  to  enforce  the  law,  declare  that  there  are  obstacles  in  the  way,  and 
that  they  are  not  able  by  any  force  to  put  down  the  traffic  among  a  certain 
class  of  people,  do  you  regard  such  a  law  as  that  as  one  which  it  is  desirable 
to  execute  by  the  exhibition  of  physical  force  ? 

A.     I  should  not  consider  the  law  as  enforced,  certainly. 

Q.  Should  you  think  that  there  was  anything  hopeful  in  such  a  law  consis- 
tent with  the  manners  of  the  whole  community  on  the  one  hand,  and  the 
liberties  of  a  free  people  on  the  other  ? 

A.  If  you  apply  that  to  the  prohibitory  law  of  this  city,  I  should  think 
that  now,  since  the  decisions  of  the  courts  have  been  made,  the  law  will 
be  enforced. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  the  law  will  change  the  opinion  of  the  people  ? 

A.    I  think  it  has  changed. 
56 


442  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Have  they  not  been  changed  so  far  heretofore  as  to  desire  a  different 
law? 

A.  I  suppose  that  from  the  simple  fact  that  the  rebellion  was  on  our  hands 
that  they  turned  to  that,  and  now,  that  the  rebellion  is  done,  they  seem  to 
take  up  the  law,  and  I  judge  that  the  design  is  to  put  it  through. 

Q.     How  do  you  judge  of  that  in  the  years  in  which  there  was  a  rebellion  ? 

A.  The  difficulty  lies  in  the  fact,  that  there  was  an  embarrassment  in  the 
courts  which  has  since  been  corrected. 

Q.     In  all? 

A.    Not  in  all,  but  in  some. 

Q.  Take  these  parts  of  the  law  that  are  not  affected  by  the  objections  to 
which  you  allude,  what  do  you  say  ? 

A.  In  the  first  place,  it  takes  some  little  while  to  get  things  in  a  working 
condition  to  carry  out  the  law. 

Q.     What  is  necessary  ? 

A.  I  have  not  examined  the  question.  I  suppose  there  is  some  little  to  be 
done  to  make  it  perfectly  proper  and  right. 

Q.    How  was  it  for  several  years  in  which  they  were  tinkering  the  law  ? 

A.  It  is  not  yet  right.  There  have  been  some  laws  which  have  been 
vetoed.  I  think  that  now  there  is  a  fair  prospect  of  enforcing  the  law  in  the 
city  of  Boston.  You  must  have  a  law  carried  out  so  as  to  prevent  the 
consumption  and  sale  of  liquor. 

Q.     Without  the  aid  of  further  legislation  ? 

A.  Without  the  aid  of  any  further  legislation  than  I  hope  we  shall  get  this 
year,  sir. 

Q.  You  mean  this,  then,  that  if  you  can  get  just  such  laws  as  you  would 
have  passed,  with  force  enough  you  can  execute  it  here  in  Boston  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  think  you  can  execute  it.  I  think  that  Boston  can  execute 
any  law  that  is  right. 

Q.  Do  you  call  that  the  fulfilment  of  the  law,  when,  over  the  heads  of  the 
people,  and  against  the  convictions  of  the  people,  you  are  executing  a  few 
men,  and  succeed  in  punishing  or  controlling  by  physical  force  a  few  men  ? 

A.  I  think  the  law  is  executed  just  so  far  as  it  is  applied  in  that  case.  I 
should  not  want  to  make  any  comparison  between  this  and  the  fugitive  slave 
law,  because  I  consider  that  as  wrong  and  this  as  right. 

Q.    But  others  consider  that  right? 

A.    Not  many  in  Massachusetts. 

Q.  Then  how  do  you  make  certain  distinction  between  the  execution  of 
the  law  in  the  individual  instance  upon  individual  men,  by  physical  force,  and 
the  fulfilment  of  the  law  by  society  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  understand  your  meaning  of  the  fulfilment  of  the 
law.  If  you  mean  the  object  for  which  law  was  made,  then  I  can  conceive  a 
distinction,  and  I  see  the  same  difficulties  in  other  laws  which  have  been  on 
the  statute  book  for  many  years,  and  that  while  they  were  made  to  suppress 
certain  evils,  they  only  partially  do  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  I  would  like  to  inquire  whether  it  is  a  custom  in 
your  church  to  locate  ministers,  without  giving  them  any  trial  whatever,  and 
locating  them  for  reasons  that  impair  their  usefulness,  or  supposed  to  impair 


APPENDIX.  443 

their  usefulness,  and  yet  upon  which  they  are  not  supposed  to  be  brought  to 
trial? 

A.  It  is  our  custom,  under  some  circumstances,  to  locate  clergymen  with- 
out request  on  their  part. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  public  opinion  in  Boston  has  been  changed  in 
regard  to  this  matter  ? 

A.    I  include  the  whole  State. 

Q.     What  would  you  say  in  regard  to  Boston  ? 

A.    I  should  think  the  opinion  had  not  varied  much. 

Q.     Should  you  think  that  the  change,  if  any,  was  in  favor  of  the  law  ? 

A.  I  think  perhaps  the  simple  fact  that  the  law  has  not  been  executed  to 
any  great  extent,  may  have  produced  some  uneasiness  and  a  desire  to  have 
something  that  could  be  executed. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  of  many  men,  whom  you  know  to  be  conscientiously 
as  earnest  as  you  were,  in  their  opinions,  whose  opinions  have  changed  in  the 
last  few  years,  in  regard  to  the  feasibility  of  this  law  ? 

A.  I  know  of  some  that  pretend  to  be  in  favor  of  temperance,  and  desire 
a  license  law,  but  whether  they  formerly  favored  prohibition  or  not,  I  do  not 
know. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  person  who  formerly  favored  prohibition  that  is 
now  against  it  ? 

A.     I  have  not  any  person  in  my  mind  now. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  has  been  any  change,  in  any  part  of  the  State,  on 
the  part  of  persons  originally  opposed  to  the  law,  who  are  now  in  favor  of  it  ? 

A.  When  I  speak  of  change  of  opinion,  I  mean  that  there  is  an  enforce- 
ment to  the  cause  of  temperance  and  in  favor  of  the  present  system,  from  the 
youth,  who  are  growing  up  to  maturity.  I  think  that  there  is  a  growing 
opinion  in  favor  of  the  law,  and  that  four  or  five  years  more  would  bring  a 
very  large  reinforcement  to  the  cause.  I  think  that  there  is  hope. 

Q.  Do  you  regard  any  use  or  sale  of  distilled  liquor,  except  on  the  pre- 
scription of  a  physician,  as  a  sin  ? 

A.  I  cannot  imagine  how  you  can  take  ardent  spirits  on  any  ground  where 
you  can  say  that  it  is  for  the  glory  of  God  to  take  them. 

Q.  That  refers  to  the  reasons  that  lead  you  to  your  opinions.  Do  you 
regard  the  drinking  of  any  distilled  or  fermented  liquors,  except  on  the  pre- 
scription of  a  physician,  as  a  sin  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  cannot  say  but  that  there  may  be  circumstances  under 
which  a  person  may  be  justified  on  a  general  principle. 

Q.    You  mean  in  emergencies  ? 

A.  1  should  have  to  fall  back  on  that  question,  and  say  that  I  should  have 
to  judge  for  myself,  as  I  could  not  judge  for  others. 

Q.  Do  you  regard  it  as  a  sin  to  use  distilled  or  fermented  liquors  in  cook- 
ing, as  in  pies,  or  in  jellies  ? 

A.  That  is  a  new  question.  Whatever  is  used  in  the  kitchen  for  cooking 
purposes  is  changed,  as  I  suppose,  and  the  alcoholic  principle  destroyed 
before  it  gets  upon  the  table. 

Q.     Then  you  do  not  regard  it  as  a  sin  to  use  these  articles  in  cooking  ? 


444  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  should  not  regard  it  as  a  sin  if  the  intoxicating  principle  were 
destroyed  before  they  were  used. 

Q.  Take  the  case  of  jellies.  Do  you  regard  it  as  a  sin  to  use  wine  in 
jelly  ? 

A.  That  is  a  question  that  I  have  not  considered  ;  it  is  a  very  important 
question. 

Q.     What  would  be  your  impression  ? 

A.    I  should  want  to  do  as  the  judge  does,  take  time  to  consider  it. 

Q.     Do  you  know  that  it  is  very  commonly  used  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  it. 

Q.  Has  it  not  come  to  your  knowledge  that  farmers  have  been  accustomed 
to  use  cider  from  time  immemorial  in  cooking  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  some  of  them  in  times  past  have  used  it,  I  suppose. 

Q.  Do  you  not  suppose  that  there  are  a  good  many  farmers  who  now  use 
cider  in  cooking  ? 

A.    I  presume  there  may  be. 

Q.     Do  you  regard  that  use  as  sinful  ? 

A.  I  stated  just  now  that,  if  the  principle  of  intoxication  is  destroyed 
before  it  is  used,  the  use  of  it  might  be  justified. 

Q.  Assuming  that  the  principle  of  intoxication  has  been  destroyed,  then 
you  do  not  regard  it  as  sinful  to  use  it  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  that  it  would  be  a  very  clear  case  that  it  was  sinful. 

Q.     You  are  quite  certain  that  it  would  not  be,  are  you  not  ? 

A.  I  am  certain  that  it  would  depend  upon  certain  circumstances,  and 
how  a  man  viewed  it. 

Q.     Would  you  avoid  it  ? 

A.     I  could  tell  better  when  the  individual  case  was  brought  up. 

Q.  I  do  not  think  you  meet  the  question.  We  are  assuming  that  certain 
articles  are  used  in  certain  cases.  Do  I  understand  you  that  it  would  be  sin- 
ful to  use  these  articles  in  these  cases  ? 

A.  That  would  depend  upon  circumstances.  If  the  intoxicating  principle 
was  destroyed,  it  would  not  be  sinful. 

Q.  Now  if  it  is  not  sinful,  those  persons  have  a  right  to  use  the  article  for 
cooking  purposes,  have  they  not  ? 

Q.     (By  Mr.  COBLEIGH.)     Do  you  mean  legal  or  moral  right  ? 

A.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     Moral  right. 

A.     I  suppose  they  have,  sir;  that  is,  if  they  do  not  consider  it  to  be  sinful. 

Q.  Taking  the  case  of  cider  and  wine,  and  taking  the  fact  as  proved  that 
the  cooking  has  destroyed  the  intoxicating  principles ;  then  taking  the  further 
fact,  as  I  understood  you  to  say,  that  that  use  is  not  sinful ;  and  then  taking 
the  further  fact  that  the  person  has  a  moral  right  to  use  these  articles,  have 
the  persons  a  right  to  go  and  purchase  them  '? 

A.  Not  if  they  cannot  get  them  without  violation  of  the  law.  There  may 
be  other  circumstances  of  a  very  grave  character  that  would  prevent  them. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  they  have  as  much  right  to  go  and  purchase 
these  articles  as  persons  have  who  use  them  for  medicinal  and  mechanical 
purposes  ? 


APPENDIX.  445 

A.  I  think  it  is  entirely  unnecessary,  and  that  they  might  forego  the  use 
of  them. 

Q.    I  understand  you  that  there  is  nothing  morally  wrong  about  it  ? 

A.  Do  not  understand  me  to  say  that  it  is  not  morally  wrong.  I  do  not 
say  that  it  is  wrong  under  a  certain  supposition. 

Q.  When  a  man  is  obliged  to  go  to  a  physician  to  see  if  he  is  to  get  it  for 
a  certain  purpose,  that  is  sufficient  that  it  is  to  be  regarded  as  proper,  is  it  ? 

A .     I  understand  that  a  prescription  is  regarded  as  proper. 

Q.  Now  suppose  it  is  made  perfectly  clear  to  the  town  agent  that  these 
articles  are  to  be  used  in  cooking,  where  the  intoxicating  principle  is  removed, 
why  not  permit  the  agent  to  sell  to  a  man  for  this  purpose  ? 

A.  I  should  think  it  would  be  very  unwise  to  make  such  a  provision,  if  a 
great  evil  is  likely  to  arise  from  it. 

Q.  Why  is  there  any  evil  now,  then  ?  In  every  case  it  is  a  question 
whether  the  application  is  honest  or  not. 

A.  Because  the  greater  the  number  of  exceptions,  the  greater  the  liability 
to  evil. 

Q.  Then  your  ground  is  that  you  have  got  to  stop  somewhere,  and  that 
it  might  be  as  well  here  as  anywhere  ?  You  do  not  consider  that  there  is  any 
more  wrong  in  using  these  elements  in  cooking  than  for  mechanical  purposes, 
do  you  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  because  a  wrong  might  grow  out  of  the  tendency.  It  is  the 
same  principle  upon  which  Paul  would  have  restrained  from  eating  meat.  If 
a  man  sees  that  the  use  of  a  thing  leads  another  person  to  it,  he  is  under 
obligation  to  cease. 

TESTIMONY  OF  T.  R.  DENNISON. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  MINER.)    Your  residence  is  in  New  Bedford  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    What  is  your  occupation  ? 

A.     I  am  a  city  missionary. 

Q.     A  lay  missionary  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  labored  in  that  capacity  ? 

A .    I  have  labored  fourteen  years  in  New  Bedford  in  that  capacity. 

Q.  Will  you  state  the  present  condition  of  the  temperance  cause  in  New 
Bedford,  and  also  the  condition  of  the  poor,  as  they  come  under  your  obser- 
vation ? 

A .  I  think  that  the  temperance  cause  in  New  Bedford  is  in  a  better  con- 
dition than  it  has  been  before  during  the  last  twenty  years. 

Q.     Do  you  mean  that  there  is  less  drinking  and  selling  ? 

A.     I  witness  less  of  the  effects  of  intemperance. 

Q.     Have  you  seen  any  favorable  effect  upon  the  poor  of  the  city  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  During  the  last  fourteen  years  I  think  that  there  are  not 
many  families  in  New  Bedford  who  have  come  to  want  because  of  this  liquor 
traffic  who  have  not  come  under  my  notice  in  some  way.  A  great  many  also 
consult  me  in  regard  to  cases  that  come  to  them,  and  thus  I  learn  the  condi- 
tion of  pretty  nearly  all  the  families. 


446  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  anything  that  leads  you  to  desire  the  repeal  of  the  pro- 
hibitory liquor  law,  or  the  engrafting  (as  it  is  called),  of  a  license  law  upon 
it? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  I  have.  On  the  other  hand,  I  think  that  we  are 
getting  along  now  very  well  indeed.  I  think  that  the  liquor  traffic  in  New 
Bedford  has  very  much  lessened,  and  that  drunkenness  in  our  streets  has 
decreased  greatly.  I  was  recently  looking  at  the  police  reports  of  1863.  In 
that  year  there  were  338 ;  in  1864,  250  ;  186*5,  183,  and  last  year,  149,— a 
falling  off  of  189.  We  are  now  doing  more  by  moral  suasion  than  we  hare 
ever  before  done,  because  we  consider  the  law  aiding  us ;  and  both  working 
together,  we  consider  it  very  favorable  to  the  cause. 

Q.     So  that  the  general  activity  of  the  temperance  friends  is  increasing  ? 

A .  It  was  never  greater  than  at  the  present  time.  We  have  more  temper- 
ance organizations  now  than  ever  before.  A  few  years  since  we  had  no 
organizations  of  the  kind.  I  used  to  be  applied  to  by  mothers  and  by  fami- 
lies who  were  suffering  because  of  drunkenness,  to  know  if  something  could 
not  be  done  to  stop  the  traffic  in  liquor. 

Q.  Speaking  of  the  American  population,  especially  in  New  Bedford,  how, 
in  your  judgment,  does  the  present  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  by  that  popula- 
tion compare  with  the  use  in  former  years  ? 

A.  It  has'fallen  off.  Very  few  of  the  American  population  are  addicted 
to  drinking. 

Q.     How  do  the  present  efforts  to  execute  the  law  succeed  ? 

A.  I  do  not  now  know  of  any  open  places  of  sale.  I  know  that  a  great  many 
places  have  closed  up  during  the  past  year.  I  do  not  see  any  of  any  account, 
and  I  have  inquired  the  condition,  in  that  respect,  of  the  different  neighbor- 
hoods where  I  have  not  gone  around,  and  they  say  there  has  been  a  great 
change  within  the  last  year. 

Q.  And  you  have  not  felt  that  this  closing  of  open  places  has  increased  the 
traffic  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  have  not.  I  am  told  that  a  great  many  who  have  been  in  the 
habit  of  cfrinking  cannot  get  it  now. 

Q.  Do  you  perceive  any  beneficial  effects  in  the  greater  comfort  of  the 
poor? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Is  it  marked  ? 

A.  Last  winter  I  had  the  fewest  calls  from  the  poor  of  any  year  since  I 
have  been  in  the  mission  business. 

Q.     During  how  many  years  ? 

A.  Fourteen.  A  large  number  have  signed  the  pledge  who  had  formerly 
been  in  the  habit  of  drinking.  The  organization  of  the  Sons  of  Temperance 
there  includes  both  male  and  female,  and  numbers  one  thousand  members. 
We  have  four  different  orders,  which  take  in  a  great  many  who  have  been 
in  the  habit  of  drinking. 

Q.  Have  you  noticed  any  change  in  regard  to  the  amount  of  crime  in  that 
city  ? 

A.  Of  course  I  regard  intemperance  as  the  source  of  a  great  deal  of  other 
crime,  —  such  as  houses  of  ill-fame. 


APPENDIX.  447 

Q.  Has  it  been  a  matter  of  general  repute  in  New  Bedford,  that  houses  of 
ill-fame  were  generally  connected  with,  the  liquor  traffic  ? 

A.  It  is  generally  said  so.  There  are  now  very  few  houses  of  ill-fame  in 
New  Bedford,  that  I  know  of,  as  compared  with  what  there  was  a  few  years 
ago. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  ROBERT  C.  PITMAN. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  to  the  Committee 
your  residence,  the  official  relations  you  have  held  to  the  City  Government, 
and  what  you  know  concerning  the  courts  of  your  county  ? 

A.  I  have  lived  in  New  Bedford  all  my  days.  My  profession  is  that  of 
attorney  at  law,  which  I  have  practised  eighteen  years.  I  have  been  in 
both  branches  of  the  Legislature,  and  held  the  Police  Court  in  New  Bedford 
from  June,  1858,  until  January,  1864.  As  to  the  temperance  reformation,  I 
have  taken  an  interest  in  it  from  my  earliest  recollection. 

Q.  Have  you  been  in  the  habit  of  giving  much  thought  to  temperance  and 
temperance  matters  ? 

A.  I  should  say  that  temperance  and  anti-slavery,  outside  of  my  profession, 
have  pretty  well  divided  my  thoughts. 

Q.  Have  your  views  upon  the  subject  of  temperance  theoretically  been  in 
harmony  with  the  doctrine  of  total  abstinence,  or  with  the  doctrine  of  mod- 
erate use  ? 

A.  I  was  brought  up  to  think  that  the  only  safe  course  was  entire  absti- 
nence from  intoxicating  liquor  as  a  beverage. 

Q.  Will  you,  in  your  own  way,  state  your  views  in  general  upon  the 
question  here  at  issue,  with  special  reference  to  prohibition  and  licenses  ? 

A.  If  the  course  had  not  already  been  pursued,  I  should  have  great  objec- 
tion to  injecting  an  argument  into  the  testimony.  In  my  own  county,  there 
has  not  been  a  license  system  from  the  earliest  dawn  of  my  recollection.  The 
people  of  the  county  took  that  matter  into  their  own  hands,  and  the  County 
Commissioners  granted  no  licenses.  The  struggle  was  before  I  came  upon  the 
stage.  I  have  investigated  the  history  of  license  laws  and  the  result  of 
attempts  to  enforce  them,  and  I  have  formed  a  very  strong  opinion  that  it  is 
impossible  to  regulate  the  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks.  I  think  it  is  a  demon- 
strated fact  that  the  sale  of  ardent  spirits  cannot  be  checked  by  license  laws. 
I  agree  with  the  statement  made  by  Mr.  Child  in  1838,  when  we  had  gone 
through  the  experience  of  a  license  law,  that  it  "  had  no  appreciable  effect  in 
checking  the  liquor  traffic."  In  regard  to  the  prohibitory  law,  I  fully  recognize 
the  great  difficulty  of  its  enforcement,  and  that  it  demands  an  expression  on  the 
part  of  the  people  that  they  wish  it  enforced.  I  fully  agree  that,  if  the  majority 
of  the  people  do  not  want  it  enforced,  that  it  never  can  be  enforced ;  that  in  a 
Republican  Government  the  only  way  we  ascertain  the  will  of  the  people  is 
by  legislation.  I  think  we  have  a  right  to  assume  that  the  people  are  in  favor 
of  this  law,  and  to  call  upon  the  people  for  its  enforcement.  In  our  own  city, 
we  have  had  many  contests  to  obtain  possession  of  the  municipal  force  for  the 
purpose  of  enforcing  the  law.  Those  contests  have  never  been  successful ; 
sometimes  we  ran  pretty  closely,  and  sometimes  were  beaten  pretty  badly.  I 
have  reason  to  believe  that  the  liquor  traffic  has  constituted  a  nucleus 


448  APPENDIX. 

of  men,  who  had  a  direct  interest  in  the  business.  The  opposition  has  been 
confined  to  clergymen,  reformers,  and  those  who  have  not  had  the  material 
wherewith  to  effect  political  action.  It  has  been  with  this,  as  it  was  with 
the  anti-slavery  battle,  the  mass  of  the  people  have  been  too  indifferent,  and 
not  having  their  minds  made  up  fully  in  favor  of  the  proposition,  have  refused 
to  decide  in  favor  of  the  actual  enforcement  of  the  law.  The  mass  of  the 
people  generally  side  with  the  existing  state  of  tilings.  I  am,  however,  fully 
convinced  that  the  prohibitory  law,  can  be  so  far  enforced  in  our  city  as  to 
check,  and  almost  entirely  prohibit,  the  open  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors. 

Q.  Do  you  recognize  any  very  marked  distinction  between  this  law  and 
other  criminal  laws  in  that  respect  ? 

A.  This  law  has  greater  opposition,  because  it  attacks  a  power  entrenched 
partly  behind  capital,  and  partly  behind  passion.  I  do  not  think  that  there  is 
any  intrinsic  impossibility  of  enforcing  the  law. 

Q.  You  speak  now,  particularly,  of  your  own  city  and  the  neighboring 
community  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  the  open  traffic  in  your  county  materially  interfered  with  at  the 
present  time  ? 

A.  From  what  I  hear  from  reliable  sources,  I  should  say  that  it  is  inter- 
fered with  and  checked  to  an  extent  that  it  has  not  been  in  any  previous  time 
within  my  recollection.  Whether  that  interference  continues,  will  depend 
upon  the  action  of  the  courts  and  of  the  district-attorneys.  My  impression  is 
that  the  reason  it  has  not  been  more  generally  enforced  heretofore,  has  been 
owing  to  the  leniency  of  the  courts,  and  the  inaction  of  the  district-attor- 
neys. I  have  known  convictions  in  my  own  court,  which,  if  followed 
up  by  sentence,  would  have  greatly  aided  in  the  suppression  of  the  traffic. 
If  respectable  dealers,  when  convicted,  had  been  sentenced,  that  class  of 
dealers  would  have  been  almost  annihilated.  Even  when  there  were  very  few 
convictions  in  my  own  court,  there  were  a  great  many  disclosing  cases  ;  and 
even  when  parties  were  convicted,  and  an  appeal  made  to  the  upper  court 
and  the  action  affirmed,  the  cases  were  put  on  file  by  the  payment  of  costs. 

Q.     And  without  sentence  ? 

A.  Without  sentence.  I  have  now  in  my  mind  a  case  where,  if  the  party 
had  been  sentenced,  it  would  have  materially  changed  the  character  of  the 
liquor-traffic. 

Q.  Has  the  difficulty  thus  arising  from  the  infidelity  of  the  officers  of  the 
court  been  removed,  or  does  it  still  remain,  in  your  county  ? 

A.  Answering  your  question  somewhat  generally,  I  may  say  that,  even 
supposing,  as  I  do,  that  the  majority  of  the  people  of  the  State  are  somewhat 
passively  in  favor  of  the  law,  a  more  active  demonstration  of  their  feeling 
upon  the  question  is  necessary  to  procure  a  right  action  by  the  district-attor- 
neys and  by  the  courts.  Every  year  that  I  live,  I  see  that  those  in  official 
stations  are  but  men,  and  are  influenced  by  active  demonstrations  of  public 
opinion ;  and  my  own  impression  is  that,  before  we  can  have  the  law  rightly 
enforced,  we  must  have  the  verdict  of  the  people  more  definitely  expressed  in 
regard  to  it. 


APPENDIX.  449 

Q.  You  have  observed,  I  suppose,  the  labors  of  the  authorities  in  other 
counties  to  enforce  the  law.  As  a  member  of  the  Legislature,  you  had  your 
attention  called  to  the  difficulty  of  executing  the  law  in  Suffolk  County  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    What  has  been  your  observation  in  that  respect  ? 

A .  This  is  a  matter  of  such  general  information,  the  difficulty  is  so  generally 
conceded,  that  I  cannot  state  it  better  than  in  the  language  of  the  Hon.  Mr. 
Parker,  in  his  report  on  the  license  law,  in  1865,  when  he  said  that  the  diffi- 
culty in  Suffolk  County  was  that  "  the  jurors  blocked  the  execution  of  the 
law." 

Q.  Have  you  any  information  in  regard  to  the  manner  those  juries  are 
selected  ? 

A.  We  had  very  full  information  given  us  by  the  Aldermen  of  Boston 
upon  that  subject. 

Q.    Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  the  facts  in  respect  to  that  matter  ? 

A.  It  appeared  that  the  jury  list  was  practically  made  up  in  Boston ;  that 
the  Board  of  Aldermen  and  Common  Councilmen  of  the  different  wards 
selected  from  the  voting  list  the  persons  to  compose  the  jury ;  that  the  list 
was  then  handed  to  the  city  clerk,  made  up  and  acted  upon  by  the  City 
Council,  and  generally  was  acted  on  as  received.  In  a  case  that  has  become 
of  somewhat  historical  importance,  two  or  three  hundred  names  were  added, 
upon  the  motion  of  a  member  of  the  Common  Council.  It  also  appeared 
that  there  was  always  one  or  two  liquor-dealers  as  members  of  the  Common 
Council,  who  were  very  likely  to  select  the  names  of  some  persons  who 
were  liquor-dealers  for  the  jury  list.  It  is  a  matter  of  fact,  that  there  were 
generally  more  or  less  liquor-dealers  upon  the  jury  list. 

Q.  Did  it  appear  that  the  number  of  dissenting  jurors,  where  the  evidence 
was  such  as  ought  to  secure  conviction,  bore  any  relation  to  the  number  of 
liquor-dealers  upon  the  jury  ? 

A.  In  some  cases  the  number  of  liquor-dealers  upon  the  jury  was  the 
precise  number  of  dissenters.  I  would  not  wish  to  be  understood  as  saying 
that  such  was  always  the  case.  It  was  stated  by  one  witness  that  sometimes 
persons  who  took  their  "  toddy  "  were  also  among  the  dissenters.  The  result 
of  the  examination  was  sufficient  to  satisfy  my  mind  that  the  removal  of  that 
obstacle  would  go  a  great  way  towards  the  removing  of  the  difficulty  in 
securing  convictions. 

Q.    Were  any  efforts  made  for  the  removal  of  that  obstacle  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  it  is  a  matter  of  history,  that  by  successive  legislation  bills 
have  been  passed  with  that  object  in  view. 

Q.  Have  you  any  general  impression  how  large,  relatively,  have  been  the 
votes  for  and  against  attempts  to  remedy  that  evil  ? 

A.  The  majorities  were  generally  pretty  large ;  not  sufficient,  however,  to 
overcome  the  veto. 

Q.  In  relation  to  a  license  law  that  is  not  prohibitory,  do  you  see  any 
decrease  of  difficulty  in  executing  such  a  law  ?  Would  you  deem  it  easier  to 
execute  a  law  against  the  unlicensed,  or  against  the  licensed  for  a  violation  of 
the  condition  of  their  license,  than  it  is  to  execute  the  present  prohibitory 
law? 

57 


450  APPENDIX. 

A.  That  question  divides  itself  into  two  or  more  parts.  As  a  lawyer,  I 
should  say  that  for  ease  of  execution,  for  thoroughness,  for  ease  in  drawing 
indictments  and  complaints,  and  for  evidence,  no  law  could  be  better  than 
the  one  that  we  now  have  upon  our  statute  books.  The  moment  you  create 
exceptions,  conditions  and  classifications,  you  raise  a  new  group  of  questions 
and  complicate  its  operation.  So  far  as  regards  convictions,  I  am  hardly  as 
good  a  judge  as  are  gentlemen  who  live  in  counties  where  there  is  a  difficulty 
in  obtaining  convictions.  I  have  refreshed  my  memory  by  a  reference  to  the 
notes  taken  in  the  hearing  upon  this  subject  in  1864.  It  was  then  stated  by 
Mr.  Brewster  that  "  it  would  depend  upon  what  the  license  was  placed  at, 
and  what  kind  of  people  were  licensed,  whether  there  would  be  ease  of  con- 
viction or  not." 

Q.     What  did  you  understand  him  tD  mean  by  that  ? 

A.  That  he  would  not  put  the  license  fee  so  high,  but  that  any  decent, 
respectable  man  could  pay  it.  Mr.  Kurtz  stated  that  he  would  place  the 
license  i'ee  at  three  hundred  dollars,  and  license  a  thousand  persons,  by  which 
he  would  have  a  revenue  of  three  hundred  thousand  dollars.  Mr.  Brewster 
thought  that  if  so  large  a  fee  was  exacted  there  would  be  a  difficulty  in 
getting  convictions.  lie  said  that  the  chief  difficulty  in  getting  convictions  in 
Boston  was  the  fact,  that  the  police  selected  the  poor  and  friendless,  and  let 
the  others  go,  and  that  indisposed  the  jurors  to  convict.  It  is,  of  course,  a 
matter  of  doubt  whether  juries  would  or  would  not  be  ready  to  convict  under 
a  license  law.  Mr.  Brewster  also  said  that  if  there  was  a  vigorous  enforce- 
ment of  the  license  law  in  Boston,  it  would  result  in  a  political  revolution, 
and  eject  from  office  the  parties  enforcing  it.  In  other  words,  if  you  had  a 
loose  license  law,  it  would  amount  to  nothing,  and  if  you  had  a  strict  one,  it 
would  not  continue  to  be  enforced. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  a  license  law  which  should  attempt  to  interfere  with 
the  love  of  gain,  or  considerably  interfere  with  the  love  of  gain  upon  the  part 
of  the  traffickers,  and  grant  no  indulgence  upon  the  part  of  the  drinkers, 
would  meet  with  any  less  objection  than  the  present  law  ? 

A.  I  think  there  would  be  quite  as  much  objection  as  now,  and  it  would 
be  intensified  by  the  odium  of  monopoly.  I  think  that  the  great  difficulty  in 
enforcing  a  license  law  would  be,  that  the  moral  principle,  or  the  momentum 
that  conies  from  a  belief  in  a  thing,  would  be  lacking.  In  Massachusetts,  the 
great  power,  after  all,  is  moral  power.  The  temperance  men,  of  all  grades, 
would  not  care  for  the  enforcement  of  the  license  law ;  it  would  be  left  for  the 
people  engaged  in  the  business,  and  they  would  do  very  little  for  it. 

Q.  Is  it  in  your  judgment  manifest  that  a  license  law  that  should  authorize 
the  hotel-keepers,  the  apothecaries,  the  grocers  and  the  victuallers  of  Boston 
to  sell  intoxicating  beverages,  and  protect  them,  of  course,  in  the  sale,  could 
in  any  sense  be  called  stringent,  or  could  in  any  degree  restrict  the  evils 
flowing  from  intemperance  ? 

A.  So  far  as  regards  hotel-keepers,  I  consider  that  they  are  the  most  dan- 
gerous class  to  license.  I  remember  a  remark  made  to  me  by  a  strong  oppo- 
nent of  the  prohibitory  law,  that  he  thought  that  more  evil  was  done  at 
Parker's  than  at  any  other  place  in  Boston,  and  he  did  not  see  why  the  State 
Constabulary  should  not  immediately  close  up  his  bar. 


APPENDIX.  451 

Q.     As  a  nuisance? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  My  opinion  is,  that  to  offer  facilities  to  the  young  to  drink  at 
hotels,  when  they  are  not  under  the  eye  of  the  public,  is  a  most  dangerous 
practice,  and  that  hotels  are  a  great  source  of  temptation  to  young  men  from 
the  country.  I  think  that  any  attempt  to  confine  the  liquor  traffic  to  any 
particular  class  of  persons,  would  be  utterly  futile.  It  has  been  tried,  and  we 
can  speak  from  experience.  The  ingenuity  of  men  in  every  country  and 
state,  has  been  expended  upon  license  laws,  for  the  last  two  hundred  years. 

Q.     And  everywhere  failed  to  restrain  the  unlicensed  ? 

A .  Yes,  sir ;  that  is  the  universal  testimony.  There  is  now  in  Rhode 
Island  a  new  bill,  for  a  new  kind  of  license  law. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MORSE.)     Have  they  had  a  prohibitory  law  ?  » 

A.  They  had  a  prohibitory  law,  and  then  they  had  a  license  law  for  two  or 
three  years  upon  the  statute  book,  and  now  they  are  about  to  repeal  that  and 
make  another  license  law.  I  do  not  think  that  a  prohibitory  law  does  any 
good  unless  it  is  enforced. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  consider  that  any  demoralizing  effect 
would  flow  from  the  enactment  of  a  license  law  that  should  assume  the  use  of 
alcoholic  beverages,  as  requisite  to  the  public  good  ? 

A,  I  think  that  it  would  tend  in  that  direction.  If  we  assume  the  use  of 
alcoholic  beverages  to  be  a  public  good,  we  ought  not  to  restrict  the  sale. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  result  of  such  a  law  upon  the  respectability  of  the 
traffic,  and  the  use  of  liquors  as  beverages  ? 

A.  I  think  that  it  would  increase  the  respectability  and  the  use.  I  think 
that  at  present,  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors,  though  not  considered  dis- 
reputable is  not  considered  respectable.  I  think  it  would  not,  in  any  sense 
of  the  word,  be  countenanced  as  a  moral  or  religious  thing. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  natural  effect  of  rendering  it  legally  respectable 
upon  the  amount  that  would  be  used  ? 

A.  I  think  that  it  would  tend  to  increase  the  amount,  and  that  to  so 
marked  an  extent,  as  to  spread  its  use  among  a  class  of  society  from  which  it 
is  now  mainly  excluded  from  principle. 

Q.  Do  you  perceive  any  very  deleterious  influences  from  the  fact  of  the 
violation  of  the  existing  law,  simply  as  a  violation  of  a  law  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  violation  of  any  law  is  very  injurious  in  its  effects.  I 
I  have  always  thought  it  to  be  a  matter  demanding  the  very  earnest  attention 
of  the  temperance  people,  and  my  influence  has  been  exerted  more  for  the 
enforcement  of  the  present  law,  than  in  preventing  the  enactment  of  a  license 
law.  I  have  said  that  I  preferred  to  see  a  license  law  enacted  than  to  see  the 
present  law  continue  to  be  trodden  under  foot. 

Q.  But  do  you  see  any  reason  for  the  repeal  of  this  law  that  would  not 
apply  with  equal  force  for  the  repealing  of  the  law  against  gambling  or 
against  houses  of  ill  fame  ? 

A.  I  would  have  the  enforcement  of  the  law  aimed  at,  and  persistently 
tried  for.  Whenever  I  became  convinced  that  it  was  impossible,  to  any 
reasonable  extent,  to  enforce  the  law,  I  would  repeal  it  and  let  the  traffic  go 
unregulated  ;  I  would  not  license  it.  But  my  impression  is  very  strong  that 
"  to  a  Yankee  mind,  an  obstacle,  is  simply  a  difficulty  to  be  overcome." 


452  APPENDIX. 

Q.     Do  you  believe  in  the  ability  of  the  State  to  suppress  the  liquor  traffic  ? 

A.  I  do.  I  should  be  ashamed  of  my  State  if  I  thought  that  the  liquor- 
dealers  were  stronger  than  the  Commonwealth. 

Q.  If  it  were  urged  that  the  sale  of  liquor  would  thereby  become  more 
secret,  and  the  use  as  a  beverage  more  general,  would  it  be  anything  different 
than  what  you  would  expect  from  wicked  men  in  all  ages  ? 

A.  That  is  a  different  thing.  A  secret  trade,  carried  on  in  that  way,  is 
not  a  reproach  upon  the  sovereignly  of  the  State. 

Q.  It  is  sometimes  thought  that  the  present  prohibitory  law  is  a  violation 
of  the  natural  right  of  man  to  sell  and  drink  liquor.  What  are  your  views 
upon  that  question,  as  compared  with  the  right  to  tax  people  to  repair  the 
damage*  of  the  liquor  traffic  ? 

A.  It  seems  to  me  perfectly  clear  that  it  is  in  the  power  of  society  to  dry 
up  the  causes  of  crime.  Dr.  Channing,  years  ago,  said  that  society  ought  'to 
aim  chiefly  at  the  prevention  of  crime,  and  although  he  was  an  extreme  advo- 
cate of  the  rights  of  individuals,  he  considered  it  the  duty  of  society  to  shield 
itself  from  the  effects  of  vice.  Dr.  Way  land  treats  the  subject  under  the 
head  of  justice  to  character,  and  considers  that  it  is  an  absolute  wrong  for  a 
person  to  allow  another  to  tempt  him  by  the  sale  of  liquor  or  opium.  He 
regarded  it  as  a  matter  of  justice  to  the  individual  that  he  should  be 
protected. 

Q.  What  hopes  do  you  entertain  under  such  a  license  law  as  is  proposed, 
that  the  cities  in  which  the  foreign  population  chiefly  reside,  would  be  able  to 
withhold  licenses  and  prevent  the  sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  presume  that  licenses  would  be  granted  in  large  cities.  Licenses 
would  be  granted  at  first,  but  whether  permanently  anybody  would  care  to 
take  out  a  license,  I  should  somewhat  doubt. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  it  would  be  possible  for  the  American  population  in 
cities,  where  the  foreign  population  chiefly  reside,  to  deliver  themselves 
from  the  burdens  of  taxation,  to  repair  the  damages  of  intemperance  ? 

A.     No,  sir;  I  doubt  whether  they  would  be  able  to. 

Q.  Suppose  the  neighboring  towns  around  Boston  should  vote  "  no 
license,"  and  Boston  and  Charlestown  should  vote  to  license,  would  those 
smaller  towns  be  able  to  protect  themselves  from  the  evils  of  intemperance  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  so  long  as  we  arc  in  Massachusetts  we  must  all  live 
and  die  together.  I  think  that  any  policy  should  be  pretty  nearly  uniform  in 
its  application  throughout  the  State. 

Q.  Do  you  see  any  objection  to  lodging  a  discriminating  power  in  the 
matter  of  the  sale  of  liquors,  with  the  people  of  the  several  towns  ? 

A.  I  think  that  it  would  not  effect  the  object  desired,  to  prohibit  the  sale 
of  liquors  in  one  town  and  allow  it  in  the  next. 

Q.  You  made  an  allusion  to  a  member  of  the  council  inserting  a  large 
number  of  names  in  the  jury  list  in  an  informal  way  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  not  in  an  informal  way ;  it  was  by  a  vote.  It  is  perfectly 
competent  for  any  person  to  add  any  number  of  names  in  the  manner  in 
which  that  was  done.  I  do  not  wish  to  be  understood  as  saying  that  there  was 
anything  improper  about  it. 


APPENDIX.  453 

Q.  Did  you  understand  anything  about  the  character  of  the  parties  whose 
namet  were  thus  added  ? 

A.  That  inquiry  was  not  gone  into.  It  was,  however,  stated  by  the  pros- 
ecuting attorney,  that  at  one  time  there  were  twelve  or  thirteen  jurors  from 
the  neighborhood  of  Fort  Hill,  and  that  he  had  great  difficulty  in  getting  votes 
upon  the  nuisance  cases. 

Q.     The  cases  brought  before  the  courts  then  were  nuisance  cases  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir  ;  chiefly. 

Q.  Had  the  Nuisance  Act,  as  it  then  stood,  as  much  power  and  efficiency 
as  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A .  It  has  been  said  that  the  "  Nuisance  Act  was  the  back-door  out  of 
which  offenders  escaped  the  punishment  that  originally  appended  to  their 
crimes."  The  Nuisance  Act  provided  for  the  punishment  of  offenders  by  fine, 
but  not  by  imprisonment.  It  was  used  as  a  police  regulation.  When  a  place 
where  liquor  was  sold  was  disorderly,  or  was  kept  open  at  unseasonable  hours, 
it  was  complained  of  just  as  any  other  disorderly  house  would  be  complained 
of. 

I  ought  to  add  one  word  in  regard  to  statistics  in  the  matter  of  intem- 
perance. I  think  that  on  both  sides  there  is  great  danger  of  being  misled 
by  statistics.  They  should  be  very  carefully  sifted  to  be  of  any  value.  The 
police  of  any  town  have  it  in  their  power  to  vary  the  statistics  of  drunkenness 
very  greatly,  by  putting  in  or  leaving  out  the  "  lodgers,"  and  in  many  other 
ways.  If  you  were  to  shut  up  half  the  drinking-houses  in  Boston,  you  would 
not  greatly  diminish  intemperance,  while  you  left  the  other  half  open ;  but 
if  you  were  to  shut  up  all  the  sources  of  temptation  for  a  few  years,  you  would 
find  a  great  change  wrought.  I  suppose,  however,  if  there  is  any  liquor  any- 
where to  be  found,  that  the  old  toper  will  have  it.  The  great  object,  I 
think,  is  to  remove  all  sources  of  temptation  from  the  young,  and  thus  help 
those  who  desire  it  to  reform. 

Q.  Would  you  include  among  the  means  by  which  the  stasistics  of  drunk- 
enness in  cities  could  be  greatly  varied,  the  different  degrees  of  inebriety  in 
which  men  might  be  arrested  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  It  was  the  custom  in  our  city,  and  I  think  it  is  very  gen- 
erally the  custom,  to  take  a  great  many  persons  and  keep  them  over  night, 
and  release  them  in  the  morning.  The  custom  varied  at  different  times,  under 
different  officers,  and  sometimes  according  to  the  standing  of  the  individual 
arrested. 

Q.  On  the  whole,  do  you  believe  that  the  drinking  usages  of  society  have 
become  more  deplorable  than  formerly  ? 

A.  It  is  interesting  to  notice  how  the  opinions  of  different  persons  vary  in 
regard  to  matters  of  so  general  a  character.  I  think  men  are  very  likely  to  be 
misled  in  their  judgment,  by  the  circumstances  in  which  they  are  placed. 
For  my  part,  I  should  hardly  venture  to  give  an  opinion  about  it. 

Q.  What  would  you  naturally  expect  as  the  consequences  of  the  great 
civil  struggle  through  which  we  have  just  passed  ? 

A.  The  histories  of  all  great  wars  and  revolutions  show  a  great  increase  of 
vice  among  the  people  affected  by  them,  and  especially  of  vices  that  take  the 


454  APPENDIX. 

form  of  dissipation.  I  think  it  rather  remarkable  that  there  has  not  been  a 
greater  increase  than  at  present  appears. 

Q.  You  heard  the  testimony  of  the  city  missionary  from  your  place  ;  does 
your  observation  confirm  his  statements  ? 

A.  My  observation  of  drinking-places  and  drunken  people  has  been  very 
limited.  My  ways  of  life  and  place  of  living  are  removed  from  them ;  and 
any  information  that  I  should  give  would  be  founded  upon  general  report.  I 
have  no  hesitation,  however,  in  stating  the  fact  that  the  open  drinking-places 
are  closed,  and  the  police  reports  show  a  decrease  of  cases  of  drunkenness  ; 
but  whether  such  decrease  be  in  consequence  of  the  closing  of  the  places  of 
sale,  or  for  some  other  cause,  I  cannot  say.  I  do  not  look  for  any  sudden  and 
immediate  change  from  the  enforcement  of  this  law.  It  seems  to  me  that  we 
are  engaged  in  a  long  warfare,  and  that  the  battle  is  to  be  fought  out  upon 
this  line. 

Q.     You  are  of  the  opinion  that  it  should  be  fought  out  upon  this  line  ? 

A.  Certainly.  I  look  to  the  State  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors  as  a  beverage.  I  think  that  the  middle  classes  are  with  us  in  the 
effort ;  the  rich  and  the  low  are,  perhaps,  against  us. 

Q.  Some  stress  is  laid  upon  the  declaration  that  there  is  a  great  deal  of 
perjury  committed  under  the  operation  of  the  present  law ;  have  you  noticed 
any  particular  difference  in  that  respect  between  the  existing  and  former 
laws? 

A.  I  suppose  that  such  results  might  follow.  He  who  drinks  another 
man's  liquor,  would  be  very  apt  to  testify  in  his  favor,  or  at  least  no  more 
against  him  than  he  could  help.  I  would  not  repeal  a  law  because  people 
sometimes  committed  perjury  under  it ;  if  I  did,  I  would  repeal  the  law 
allowing  defendants  to  testify. 

Q.  When  you  find  jurors  and  officials  proving  unfaithful  under  the  exist- 
ing state  of  things,  do  you  attribute  that  unfaithfulness  to  the  prohibitory 
liquor  law,  or  do  you  consider  that  the  law  only  serves  an  opportunity  for  the 
development  of  their  infidelity  ? 

A.  The  apostle  Paul  said  that  if  there  had  been  no  law,  there  would 
have  been  no  sin.  I  will  not  say  whether  it  is  the  cause,  or  the  occasion. 

Q.  Have  you  observed  any  such  opposition  to  this  law,  or  any  such  infi- 
delity on  the  part  of  the  officers  charged  with  its  execution,  as  you  would  not 
have  expected  from  the  parties  themselves,  from  their  habits,  opinions,  and 
predelictions,  taking  human  nature  as  it  is  ? 

'A.  That  requires  me  to  gauge  my  expectation  of  human  virtue  a  little 
more  than  I  have  been  accustomed  to.  The  trouble  is  here  :  a  man  is  con- 
victed ;  the  question  is  whether  or  not  he  shall  receive  the  sentence  that  the 
law  awards  ;  the  temperance  people  are  not  going  to  seek  out  the  prosecuting 
officer,  and  ask  for  a  particular  sentence, — there  is  something  odious  in  so 
doing;  yet,  on  the  other  hand,  the  whole  fraternity  of  drinkers  and  traffick- 
ers, with  all  the  influence,  political  and  otherwise  that  they  can  bring  to  bear, 
are  seeking  a  favorable  disposition  of  the  case.  I  think  the  only  way  to 
secure  the  fidelity  of  the  officers,  is  to  let  them  know  that  their  tenure  of 
office  depends  upon  their  fidelity. 


APPENDIX.  455 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  You  find  the  conduct  of  both  judges  and  prose- 
cuting officers  objectionable,  and  open  to  criticism  under  the  law  ? 

A.     Not  only  under  this  law,  but  also  under  kindred  laws. 

Q.  Is  there  or  is  there  not,  any  objection  to  be  made  as  to  the  character 
and  conduct  of  the  jurors  ? 

A.  As  a  general  thing  there  is  not.  There  are  exceptions,  of  course,  but 
as  a  general  thing,  in  Bristol  County,  the  juries  have  found  verdicts,  where 
they  reasonably  ought.  I  want  to  say  a  word  in  regard  to  the  District- Attor- 
neys. We  have  had  four  district-attorneys  within  a  short  time,  and  I  do 
not  intend  rny  remarks  to  apply  to  the  present  incumbent,  nor  to  any  particular 
person. 

Q.  Then  the  machinery  has  been  pretty  good  but  it  has  not  been  well 
worked  ? 

A.     That  is,  perhaps,  a  fair  statement. 

Q.  How  far  has  the  community  itself  worked  with  the  machinery  and 
against  the  courts  and  district-attorneys  ? 

A.  That  is  a  point  that  I  supposed  I  had  previously  stated.  I  will  illus- 
trate by  a  case  at  the  police  court.  A  party  was  convicted.  The  temperance 
part  of  the  community  had  a  general  desire  to  see  the  law  executed,  but  they 
made  no  active  exertion  in  the  matter ;  they  did  not  see  the  district-attorney 
nor  say  anything  about  it.  The  influential  liquor-dealers  upon  the  other  side, 
brought  all  their  influence  to  bear  upon  him ;  the  lawyers  and  the  politicians, 
who  considered  the  liquor  vote  important,  would  lend  their  influence  if  it  was 
necessary.  They  were  understood  to  be  a  reserved  force  who  could  be  had 
when  wanted. 

Q.  How  have  the  community  acted  in  the  discharge  of  their  political 
duties  ? 

A.  We  have  made  the  issue  several  times  and  we  have  been  beaten, 
because  it  was  a  moral  principle  against  capital.  We  have  been  beaten  several 
times. 

Q.     And  is  that  the  attitude  in  which  you  now  stand  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q,.     Beaten  by  the  vote  of  the  people  in  your  own  city  of  New  Bedford  ? 

A .  Yes,  sir ;  not,  however,  acting  really  upon  that  question.  It  was 
always  complicated  with  some  other. 

Q.  You  had,  then,  not  only  to  contend  with  the  obstacles  on  the  part  of 
the  magistrates,  but  you  had  also  to  contend  with  the  difficulties  that  pertained 
to  the  open  hostility  of  enemies,  and  the  cold  and  unwilling,  or  hesitating 
support  of  friends  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Thus  the  magistracy  and  public  opinion  stand  together  ? 

A.  Not  exactly.  I  think  that  the  magistracy  would  not  enforce  the  law, 
even  if  these  indifferent,  hesitating  people  were  to  applaud  it.  I  have  read 
jn  the  papers,  commendations  of  persons  who  enforced  it,  and  strictures  upon 
those  who  did  not  enforce  it. 

Q.  Your  experience  during  the  last  fifteen  years, — your  experience  as  a 
jurist  and  as  a  citizen, — your  reading  and  reflection,  have  all  led  you  to  this 
conclusion,  and  the  attitude  in  which  you  stand  to-day  is  that  of  controversy  ? 


456  APPENDIX. 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     And  you  propose  to  "  fight  it  out  on  this  line  "  for  years  longer  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.     Therefore,  as  the  matter  now  stands,  it  is  simply  a  struggle  for  power  ? 

A.  It  is  a  struggle  to  obtain  the  control  of  the  State  to  such  an  extent  as 
to  control  the  personnel  that  execute  the  law. 

Q.    In  some  respects,  then,  it  is  a  doubtful  struggle  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  ;  I  think  that  we  have  a  faithful  Chief  Magistrate,  who 
has  instructed  the  State  Constabulary  to  enforce  the  law. 

Q.     But  no  member  of  a  State  government  can  alone  maintain  a  law  ? 

A .  We  have  a  Legislature  that  will  help  him ;  if  we  have  not,  we  will  try 
it  again. 

Q.  That  brings  back  the  question,  while  it  remains  a  controversy,  is  it  not 
in  some  sense  at  least,  a  doubtful  one  ? 

A.  Not  to  my  mind.  I  think  the  triumph  of  Truth  is  never  doubtful.  I 
think  we  are  right. 

Q.     And  when  you  succeed,  it  will  be  a  triumph  of  faith,  I  suppose  ? 

A.     And  of  works,  also. 

Q.  This,  then,  being  the  attitude  in  which  we  at  present  stand :  one  por- 
tion of  the  community  arrayed  in  controversy  in  respect  to  the  maintenance 
of  a  given  machinery  of  legislation,  against  another  portion  of  the  community 
who  are  opposed  to  that  machinery  of  legislation,  and  after  fifteen  years  of 
controversy,  it  remains  to-day  a  doubtful  question  on  which  side  the  majority 
of  the  people  of  Massachusetts  are,  you,  nevertheless,  as  a  jurist  and  a  citizen, 
advise  to  keep  up  the  fight  ? 

A.  I  should  if  your  premises  were  correct,  but  I  do  not  allow  your 
premises.  There  has  not  yet  been  fifteen  years  of  struggle. 

Q.  Then  after  fifteen  years  of  the  existence  of  the  machinery,  you  still 
advise,  as  a  jurist  and  a  citizen,  to  keep  up  the  fight  ? 

A.  I  do,  because  until  within  the  past  two  years,  the  machinery  had  been 
rusting. 

Q.     And  you  have  no  idea,  I  suppose,  about  how  long  you  will  keep  it  up  ? 

A.  I  shall  keep  it  up  as  long  as  a  man  ought  to  keep  up  a  good  fight  in  a 
good  cause.  We  intend  to  take  no  steps  backward. 

Q.  Do  you  propose  to  use  the  machinery  of  the  law  for  the  purpose  of 
procuring  moral  conviction  in  the  minds  of  men  ? 

A.     That  is  one  great  object 

Q.  And  therefore  you  deliberately  use  the  criminal  processes  of  the  Com- 
monwealth— the  criminal  law  of  the  Commonwealth,  and  the  bayonets  of  the 
Commonwealth,  to  produce  moral  conviction  in  the  minds  of  men  V 

A.  We  propose  to  execute  a  law  that  we  believe  to  be  a  right  law.  The 
law  educates  the  people,  and  will  create  a  public  opinion  that  will  sustain  the 
law. 

Q.  The  controversy  is  between  one  portion  of  the  people  of  Massachusetts 
and  another  portion  of  the  people  of  Massachusetts,  and  it  is  as  yet  doubtful 
on  which  side  is  the  majority  ? 

A.  It  is  doubtful  whether  the  majority  are  ready  to  enforce  the  law,  but  I 
assume  that  a  majority  are  in  favor  of  the  law.  If  the  majority  are  opposed 


APPENDIX.  457 

to  the  law,  I  am  not  only  willing  that  they  should,  but  suppose  that  they  will, 
repeal  it. 

Q.  Then,  without  any  knowledge  of  which  way  the  majority  of  the  people 
are,  in  regard  to  the  enforcement  of  the  law,  and  after  this  experience  of 
fifteen  years,  you  still  advise  to  keep  up  the  controversy,  and  seek  a  vigorous 
enforcement  of  this  legislation  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  a  majority  of  the  people  are  in  favor  of  the  law.  When 
it  comes  to  the  question  whether  or  not  a  majority  of  the  people  are  in  favor 
of  its  vigorous  enforcement,  that  is  a  question  that  admits  of  different  degrees 
of  answering,  according  to  what  you  understand  by  a  vigorous  enforcement. 
I  believe  in  keeping  the  law  upon  the  statute,  book,  because  that  it  is  the  law 
of  the  people,  and  I  believe  in  calling  upon  the  people  for  help  to  enforce  it. 

Q.  You  would  hold  the  law  over  the  people  as  a  terror  to  evil-doers,  but 
without  being  able  to  enforce  the  law  ? 

A.  It  is  pretty  well  enforced  now  ;  if  we  can  hold  it  at  this  point  we  will 
do  a  great  deal. 

Q.  You  have  criticized  the  conduct  of  the  courts  ;  you  have  criticized  the 
conduct  of  the  district-attorneys  ;  you  have  criticized  the  conduct  of  the  peo- 
ple of  your  own  district,  of  your  own  part  of  the  State ;  you  assume  that 
those  are  the  temperance  people  who  are  in  favor  of  your  law,  and  you  pro- 
pose to  stand  by  this  particular  piece  of  machinery,  notwithstanding  it  is  not 
sustained  by  the  sentiment  of  the  people,  whether  that  sentiment  be  consid- 
ered as  represented  by  the  judiciary,  by  the  prosecuting  officers,  by  the  public 
opinion  of  the  great  mass  of  the  people,  or  by  the  fidelity  of  the  temperance 
people.  Is  that  your  position? 

A.  I  do  propose  to  adhere  to  the  machinery  of  the  law  ;  that  was  your 
question, — the  rest  was  all  argument.  I  do  not  accept  your  statement  of  what 
I  have  said. 

Q.     Do  you  say  that  you  do  not  criticize  the  conduct  of  the  courts  ? 

A.     I  do  criticize  them.  * 

Q.     Do  you  criticize  the  district-attorneys  ? 

A.     Yes. 

Q.  Did  you  not  say  that  a  majority  of  the  people  of  your  own  district 
have  not  stood  up  for  the  maintenance  and  enforcement  of  this  law  ? 

A.  I  did,  sir.  You  just  said  that  they  were  in  sentiment  opposed  to  it ;  I 
do  not  agree  to  that. 

Q.  And  have  you  not  said  that  the  temperance  people,  ranking  in  favor  of 
this  law,  have  not  stood  by  it  with  fidelity  ? 

A.    Yes, — using  "  temperance  "  in  its  full  meaning. 

Q.     And  yet  you  advise  to  adhere  to  this  machinery  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  to  use  the  power  of  this  machinery  to  enforce  the  obedience  of 
the  people  ? 

A.  I  do,  because  this  law  has  been  more  successful  than  any  other  that  has 
been  tried,  and  promises  still  greater  success. 

Q,     Are  you  not  aware  that  the  whole  history  of  legislation,  since  about 
three  hundred  years  ago,  in  England,  shows  an  effort  on  the  part  of  the  law- 
making  power  to  produce  just  such  results  as  these,  and  without  success  ? 
58 


458  APPENDIX. 

A.  By  means  of  license  laws  or  by  prohibitory  laws  ?  I  am  not  aware  of 
the  enactment  of  any  prohibitory  law  before  the  law  of  Maine. 

Q.     Are  you  not  aware  of  attempts  at  prohibition  in  other  countries  ? 

A .     There  may  have  been  ;  I  am  not  aware  of  it. 

Q.     Then  you  are  not  aware  of  the  law  of  1737,  in  England  ? 

A.     I  am  not. 

Q.    Nor  of  the  old  legislation  of  Scotland  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  I  should  like  to  ask  you  whether  or  not,  in  the  city 
of  New  Bedford,  the  city  government  has  really  excluded  liquor-dealers  from 
the  list  of  jurors? 

A .  I  cannot  tell  you  as  to  that.  The  question  never  has  been  raised.  I 
can  only  say  that,  as  a  general  thing,  we  have  not  had  liquor-dealers  upon  the 
juries. 

Q.  Is  it  your  impression  that  any  rule  has  ever  been  practically  or  for- 
mally adopted  by  the  city  government,  excluding  from  the  jury  list  the  names 
of  those  who  deal  in  liquor  V 

A.  I  think  not.  I  think,  however,  that  most  of  our  aldermen  would 
exclude  liquor-dealers  as  improper  persons  ;  but  as  we  have  had  no  real  diffi- 
culty in  getting  convictions,  no  interest  has  been  awakened  in  the  question, 
and  no  issue  has  been  raised. 

Q.  You  are  of  course  familiar  with  the  fact  that  when  a  jury  is  drawn,  it 
is  drawn  for  the  hearing  of  all  the  cases  that  come  before  that  term  of  the 
court  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  also  recognize  the  fact  that  a  large  part  of  those  drawn  as 
jurors,  who  might  be  objectionable  on  liquor  cases  because  they  were  liquor- 
dealers,  would  be  entirely  suitable  for  the  hearing  of  other  cases  ? 

A.  I  think  not.  I  think  that  a  man  who  habitually  violates  a  law  of  the 
State,  is  not  a  good  citizen,  is  not  a  sound  man  to  act  upon  any  question  of 
criminal  law.  I  think  that  the  State  owes  it  to  itself  to  say  that  a  class  of 
men  who  openly  violate  the  law  as  a  trade,  are  not  good  citizens. 

Q.     And  therefore  ought  to  be  excluded  from  serving  on  all  juries  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  stated,  in  answer  to  one  of  the  inquiries,  that  it  ought  not  to  be 
assumed  that  the  liquor-dealers  were  stronger  than  the  Commonwealth.  Do 
you  consider  that  a  statement  of  the  entire  ground  ?  Do  you  think  that  it  is 
a  contest  between  the  liquor-dealers  upon  one  side  and  the  State  upon  the 
other  ? 

A.     I  think  that  it  may  essentially  be  described  in  that  way. 

Q.  You  use  the  term  "  liquor-dealers,"  I  suppose,  rather  as  a  figurative 
expression,  as  describing  the  party  opposing  the  license  law  ? 

A.     It  is  a  part  put  for  the  whole — a  sort  of  figure  of  speech. 

Q.  In  reference  to  a  question  that  Governor  Andrew  asked  you,  I  suppose 
you  agree  to  this :  that  there  is  a  difference  of  opinion  in  regard  to  the  ques- 
tion whether  or  not  the  majority  of  the  people  of  the  State  actually  support 
and  believe  in  the  present  law.  Would  you  be  willing  to  leave  the  settlement 
of  the  question  to  the  direct  action  of  the  people  of  the  State  ?  Would  you 


APPENDIX.  459 

be  willing  to  leave  the  question  of  the  passage  of  a  license  law  to  the  people, 
and  let  a  direct  vote  be  taken  upon  it  ? 

A.  *  As  a  lawyer,  I  do  not  believe  in  that  kind  of  legislation  ;  as  a  temper- 
ance man,  I  do  not  care  how  you  bring  the  issue,  if  you  bring  it  fairly  before 
the  people.  As  a  lawyer,  with  my  ideas  of  the  distribution  of  power,  I  do 
not  believe  in  the  submission  of  legislative  questions  to  a  popular  vote. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  in  this  particular  case  it  would  be  wise  to  submit 
this  question  to  the  people  of  the  State,  and  let  them  vote  directly  upon  it, 
and  let  them  decide  whether  or  not  they  will  permit  the  form  of  a  license  law 
to  be  engrafted  upon  the  present  law  ? 

A.  I  cannot  waive  my  objection  to  that  manner  of  legislation.  If  you 
mean  to  ask  me  if  I  should  consider  it  any  calamity  if  the  question  were  to  be 
thus  submitted,  I  answer,  no;  but  if  I  were  a  member  of  the  Legislature  I 
could  not  vote  to  thus  submit  it. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  such  a  decision  would  go  a  great  way  towards 
settling  the  controversy  that  must  exist  as  long  as  the  matter  remains  as  it  is 
now? 

A.     I  think  not ;  the  same  thing  would  be  tried  over  and  over  again. 

Q.  Suppose  the  question  was  submitted  to  the  people,  and  they  were  to 
decide  not  to  have  a  license  law,  it  would,  of  course,  prevent  people  from 
coming  here  and  saying  that  the  Legislature  did  not  represent  the  people  of 
the  State  ? 

A.  It  would  be  substituting  another  kind  of  government  for  that  which 
we  now  live  under.  I  think  that  it  would  be  an  unwise  thing  to  say  to  the 
people  that  we  submit  to  them  whether  this  criminal  law  shall  be  repealed, 
and  especially  now  when  we  are  making  renewed  efforts  to  enforce  it. 

Q.  But  when  a  very  large  portion  of  the  people  of  the  State  claim  that 
the  law  is  allowed  to  remain  upon  the  statute  book  simply  because  it  is  not 
enforced,  is  it  not  the  best  way  to  end  the  controversy  to  permit  the  people  of 
the  State  to  vote  directly  upon  the  question  whether  such  a  law  shall  remain 
or  be  repealed  ? 

A.     I  do  not  believe  that  a  majority  of  the  people  are  in  favor  of  a  change. 

Q.  Why  are  you  not  willing  to  waive  your  objection  as  a  lawyer,  for  the 
sake  of  ending  the  controversy,  and  submit  the  question  to  the  people  ? 

A.  Because  we  now  have  possession  of  the  ground  and  have  a  right  to 
regard  the  controversy  as  closed. 

Q.  But  it  is  not  so  regarded  by  the  people  of  the  State,  otherwise  we 
should  not,  every  year,  have  these  applications  for  a  change  ? 

A.  I  know  of  no  better  reflection  of  the  will  of  the  people  than  the  acts 
of  the  Legislature.  If  we  had  a  different  kind  of  government, — a  government 
in  which  all  questions  of  legislation  were  submitted  to  the  people, — then  there 
would  be  nothing  invidious  about  it. 

Q.  Is  there  upon  the  statute  book  any  other  law  in  respect  to  which  the 
opinions  of  good  men  are  so  equally  divided  ? 

A.  I  think  that  they  are  more  divided  in  regard  to  the  law  forbidding  per- 
sons to  travel  upon  the  Sabbath. 

Q.     That  law  is  not  in  force. 

A .    But  you  asked  about  any  law  upon  the  statute  book. 


460  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Is  that  not  one  of  the  laws  that  is  tolerated  upon  the  statute  book  only 
because  it  is  not  enforced  ? 

A.  That  involves  another  question  of  which  I  am  in  doubt :  whether  the 
people  would  vote  to  enforce  it  or  not.  I  do  not  think  this  law  should  be 
singled  out  from  all  other  laws,  and  submitted  to  the  people.  This  law 
has  been  upon  the  statute  book  for  fifteen  years,  and  I  see  no  reason  why  it 
should  now  be  submitted  to  the  people. 

Q.  You  would  then  not  be  in  favor  of  submitting  to  the  people  the  ques- 
tion whether  or  not  the  license  law  should  be  engrafted  upon  this  law  ? 

A.     I  would  not  be,  for  the  reasons  that  I  have  stated. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  Do  you  think  that  there  is  any  propriety  in  speak- 
ing of  engrafting  a  license  law  upon  the  present  law?  Does  the  principle 
of  the  proposed  license  law  bear  any  analogy  to  the  principle  of  the  present 
prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  it  does.  One  is  based  upon  the  ground  that  the 
use  of  intoxicating  beverages  is  a  public  good  ;  the  other  that  it  is  not. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  it  possible  that  this  controversy  could  be  suppressed, 
except  by  the  triumph  of  prohibition  ? 

A.     That  is  my  view  of  it,  as  I  have  previously  stated. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  FAY.)  Is  it  your  opinion  that  the  practical  operation  of  this 
law  has  been  seriously  interfered  with  from  the  beginning,  by  the  numerous 
legal  questions  that  have  been  carried  to  the  higher  courts  ? 

A.  The  operation  of  the  law  from  the  beginning,  has  been  embarrassed  by 
the  various  decisions  that  have  been  given.  After  the  law  was  passed,  the 
people  were  timid  about  using  it  for  some  years  ;  then  came  the  anti-slavery 
agitation  which,  for  a  time,  occupied  the  attention  of  everybody  ;  then  came 
the  war ;  and  now  I  feel  that  the  people  are  just  beginning  to  address  them- 
selves to  the  real  struggle. 

TESTIMONY  OF  OLIVER  AMES. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)  We  would  like  your  views  upon  the  questions 
now  before  the  Committee,  in  regard  to  the  existing  prohibitory  law  and  the 
proposed  license  law  ? 

A.  I  believe  that  I  have  been  previously  all  through  this  matter  of  a  license 
law.  So  far  as  my  own  experience  in  the  matter  goes,  the  prohibitory  law  in 
our  town  has  been  of  very  great  service.  We  suffered  very  much  more  under 
the  old  license  law  than  we  have  under  the  prohibitory  law.  We  arc  now 
able  almost  entirely  to  keep  out  the  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks,  although  as  we 
live  so  near  Boston  people  are  able  to  get  liquor  from  here  and  to  distribute  it 
there  to  some  extent.  But  that  is  but  a  small  matter  compared  with  the  evil 
that  was  originally  done.  I  believe  that  in  Bristol  County,  since  the  "  twenty- 
eight  gallon  law"  was  in  force,  the  votes  have  been  ten  to  one  against  licensing 
anybody  to  sell  intoxicating  liquors.  I  suppose  that  if  the  people  of  that 
county,  at  the  present  time,  could  vote  upon  this  proposed  change,  there 
would  be  nearly  as  a  great  a  majority  as  ten  to  one  against  the  license  law. 
We  now  have  very  little  sold,  no  open  sale,  or  drunkenness  in  our  village  ; 
but  I  can  recollect  very  well  under  the  old  license  law,  when  at  least  one-half 
of  the  people  were  drunkards.  When  our  town  had  at  least  fifty  per  cent. 


APPENDIX.     *  4G1 

less  population  than  it  has  to-day,  our  expenses  for  pauperism  were  very  nearly 
double  what  they  are  at  the  present  time.  I  have  been  a  close  observer  of  this 
matter  in  our  town.  I  have  been  an  active  temperance  man  for  forty  years, 
and  opposed  to  the  license  law.  When  the  matter  of  licensing  has  been 
left  to  the  County  Commissioners,  in  almost  every  case  we  selected  men  for 
that  office  who  were  opposed  to  granting  licenses. 

Q.    Is  the  sentiment  against  the  license  law  as  strong  now  as  formerly  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is.  among  the  American  population.  Among  the  foreign 
population,  of  course,  it  is  not  quite  so  strong.  Among  the  American  popula- 
tion, I  think  the  sentiment  is  just  as  strong  to-day  as  it  was  twenty  years  ago. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  enough  of  the  operation  of  the  old  license  laws  as  to 
state  whether  or  not  they  served  to  restrain  the  traffic  at  all  ? 

A.  The  old  license  law  did  not,  for  everybody  had  a  license,  and  every- 
body sold  who  wished  to.  I  know  that  in  our  own  employment  (and  we 
employ  a  great  number  of  men  and  have  for  many  years),  that  under  the  old 
license  system  the  work  would  be  frequently  almost  broken  up  by  the  intem- 
perance of  the  men.  Now  we  have  no  trouble  of  that  kind.  I  do  not  see  a 
drunken  man  about  our  place  once  in  a  year,  if  I  do  once  in  five  years.  The 
foreign  population,  I  believe,  occasionally  find  rum  somewhere. 

Q.     But  they  do  not  drink  it  constantly  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  but  they  sometimes  get  it  from  Boston,  where  the  law  is  not 
executed,  and  take  it  out  in  carpet  bags,  etc. 

Q.  How  are  the  habits  of  the  people  whom  you  employ  as  compared  with 
what  they  were  ten  or  fifteen  years  ago,  in  respect  to  intemperance  ? 

A.  The  foreign  element  is  very  much  larger  than  formerly,  and  they  have 
no  strong  feeling  towards  temperance,  but,  as  a  general  thiiig,  are  in  favor  of 
drinking. 

Q.  Do  you  see  any  marked  difference  in  the  habits  of  the  American 
portion  of  your  men  ? 

A.  I  think  their  habits  are  better  than  they  were  ten  years  ago.  I  do  not 
know,  however,  as  they  are  decidedly  better. 

Q.     They  were  very  good  then,  I  suppose  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir.     Very  few  of  our  American  people  are  intemperate. 

Q.  Would  you  not  regard  it  as  a  great  calamity  to  this  State,  if  the  Legis- 
lature should  pass  a  license  Idw,  giving  legal  sanction  to  the  traffic  in 
intoxicating  drinks  as  beverages? 

A.  1  would.  I  believe  you  could  not  inflict  a  greater  curse  upon  the  State 
of  Massachusetts  than  to  give  free  licenses. 

Q.  If  you  have  any  other  views  you  would  like  to  express,  please  state 
them. 

A.  I  have  nothing  particular  to  say,  except  concerning  my  own  experience 
in  my  own  place.  1  do  not  know  much  about  Boston,  except  that  anybody 
that  comes  here  to  get  liquor  can  get  it. 

Q.  How  is  it  in  your  surrounding  towns  ?  Are  the  people  as  intemperate 
as  in  Easton  ? 

A .  Very  nearly  the  same.  Perhaps  the  law  is  not  enforced  quite  so  well  in 
some  of  our  neighboring  towns  as  it  is  in  Easton.  The  law  is  universally 
enforced  there.  Of  course  AVC  cannot  stop  every  place  from  selling.  There 


462  '     APPENDIX. 

are  some  places,  I  suppose,  where  people  still  sell,  but  it  is  pretty  difficult  to 
find  it  out.  If  they  do  sell  it  is  done  in  the  night  and  in  a  clandestine 
manner. 

Q.    I  suppose  the  open  sale  would  not  be  tolerated  a  moment  there  ? 

A .     No,  sir ;  I  think  it  would  not. 

Q.  t  What  is  your  idea  of  the  doctrine  broaqhed  here,  that  the  more  you 
suppress  the  sale  the  greater  will  be  the  sale  ;  that  the  more  convictions  you 
get  and  the  more  you  drive  it  out  ef  sight,  the  greater  the  sale  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  is  a  correct  doctrine.  I  think  that  the  more 
respectable  you  make  the  business  the  greater  will  be  the  sale. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICII.)  You  are  engaged  in  manufacturing  agricultural 
implements  at  Easton  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  Ex-Lx.  Gov.  ELIPHALET  TRASK. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)  You  know  the  question  before  the  Legislature. 
We  would  like  to  have  your  views  upon  it. 

A.  I  suppose  that  it  is  generally  known  (and  if  it  is  not  I  can  state  it), 
that  I  have  always  been  in  favor  of  the  present  prohibitory  law  ;  and  am  still 
in  favor  of  it. 

Q.     Do  you  think  it  practicable  to  enforce  it  ? 

A.  I  do,  sir.  I  think  there  is  no  difficulty  in  enforcing  it  if  the  authorities 
of  the  cities  so  decide. 

Q.     Were  you  ever  Mayor  of  Springfield  ? 

A.    I  was  in  1855. 

Q.    You  made  some  effort  to  enforce  the  law  ? 

A.    I  did. 

Q.     With  what  success  ? 

A.  I  call  the  success  very  good.  The  present  law  went  into  effect  on  the 
1st  of  July.  If  I  recollect  rightly  there  was  a  prohibitory  law  that  was 
enacted  in  1852  or  1853,  authorizing  cities  and  towns  to  appoint  agencies  for 
the  sale  of  liquor.  Then  in  1855  there  was  an  amendment  to  that  law.  I  do 
not  remember  the  time  exactly,  but  I  think  that  it  took  effect  the  1st  of  July, 
1855.  I  instructed  my  police  to  enforce  the^  law.  I  gave  instructions  to  the 
City  Marshal,  and  he  carried  them  out  the  best  that  he  could.  The  result 
was  that  in  a  very  short  time  there  were  a  few  prosecutions,  and  the  open  sale 
was  checked.  There  was  not  a  hotel,  or  a  saloon  where  the  open  sale  was 
continued  as  it  is  continued  to-day.  The  sale  of  liquor  is  not  suppressed  there 
now.  Liquor  was  then  to  some  extent  brought  into  the  town  in  the  night- 
time, and  undoubtedly  there  was  a  good  deal  of  it  used ;  undoubtedly  there 
were  sales  of  liquor,  but  the  open  sale  was  then  suppressed.  There  was  not 
an  open  bar*  in  the  city.  With  one  saloon  we  had  some  difficulty — the  most 
respectable  saloon  in  the  city  ;  the  party  keeping  it  was  prosecuted.  He  had 
been  previously  prosecuted,  convicted  and  put  under  bonds  for  two  thousand 
dollars  to  keep  the  peace.  He  was  convicted  under  my  administration  and 
his  property  was  attached.  I  did  not  remain  in  office  long  enough  to  finish 
up  the  suit,  and  it  was  withdrawn  the  next  year,  but  his  property  was  attached 
and  he  did  not  keep  an  open  bar,  as  I  was  informed  by  the  City  Marshal. 


APPENDIX.  463 

Q.  Although  the  open  sale  was  suppressed,  you  say  there  was  still  a  secret 
sale? 

A.  Undoubtedly  there  was.  I  do  not  know  of  the  fact,  but  undoubtedly 
there  was  a  secret  sale.  We  were  troubled  considerably  by  people  bringing 
liquor  to  Thompsonville  in  Connecticut  and  leaving  it  there  until  the  night- 
time, when  they  would  bring  it  up  in  boats  and  wagons.  I  recollect  that  the 
City  Marshal  chased  a  man  through  the  town  one  day,  who  had  a  lot  of  jugs 
underneath  a  load  of  cabbages  which  he  got  near  Thompsonville ;  but  the 
Marshal  did  not  succeed  in  overhauling  him.  Liquor  was  no  doubt  frequently 
brought  in  in  that  way.  I  do  not  think  that  there  is  any  difficulty  in 
enforcing  the  present  law. 

Q.     Have  you  had  the  Constables  up  there  yet  ? 

A.  There  are  two  in  that  county,  located  at  Springfield,  and  they  look 
after  the  matter  somewhat — all  that  they  are  able  to.  The  people  there  are 
satisfied  with  the  working  of  the  State  Constabulary  thus  far  ;  but  they  can  do 
very  little  where  there  is  so  much  opposition.  I  spoke  of  the  secret  sale  of 
liquor  under  my  administration.  It  has  been  said  that  people  will  as  much  get 
liquor  in  a  secret  way  as  if  it  is  sold  openly.  I  do  not  think  so,  for  this 
reason.  We  had  a  liquor  agency  before  I  was  mayor.  It  had  been  in  operation 
some  two  or  three  years.  Under  my  administration  I  issued  a  proclamation 
on  the  1st  July,  that  they  must  take  notice  of  the  law  and  govern  themselves 
accordingly.  The  liquor  agency  continued  through  the  year  to  sell  only  in 
small  quantities  according  to  the  law.  I  was  informed  at  one  time  that  the 
town  agent  had  sold  more  than  six  gallons  to  one  person,  and  I  told  him  not 
to  sell  in  such  quantities  again,  but  let  the  party  go  to  Boston  to  the  State 
Agent  to  obtain  such  a  quantity.  Only  in  that  one  case  was  there  such  an 
amount  of  liquor  sold,  and  it  was  generally  sold  in  very  small  quantities, 
usually  upon  prescriptions.  The  agent  sold  that  year,  according  to  his  report  to 
the  State  Treasurer,  liquor  amounting  to  $5,574.83 ;  in  1856,  $1,249.36 ;  in 
1857,  $82.37  ;  in  1858,  $26.31.  In  1859  another  mayor  was  chosen,  and  he 
endeavored  to  do  what  he  could  to  enforce  the  law.  There  was  received  that 
year  $205.38.  In  1860,  'by  some  oversight,  there  was  no  report  from  the 
liquor  agency  made  to  the  State  Treasurer ;  but  the  reports  for  1860  and  1861 
were  given,  inclusive,  and  amounted  to  $244.  The  mayor  endeavored  to 
enforce  the  law,  and  the  most  of  that  $244  was  undoubtedly  under  his  admin- 
istration. In  1862  the  amount  is  $54.67;  in  1863,  $43.35;  in  1864,  $39.56. 
In  1865  and  1866  there  were  no  reports  made  to  the  Treasurer  of  sales  from 
the  liquor  agent.  What  was  received  I  do  not  know,  as  the  reports  are  silent 
upon  the  subject.  Inclnding  the  eleven  years  that  I  have  referred  to,  with 
the  exception  of  the  two  years  already  mentioned,  there  has  not  been  much 
effort  made  for  the  suppression  of  the  traffic  in  liquors.  The  amount  sold  for 
the  eleven  years,  inclusive,  makes  $1,494.40,  while  the  year  previous,  while 
the  law  was  not  attempted  to  be  enforced,  there  was  $5,574.83  received.  I 
do  not  know  but  the  sentiment  of  the  people  at  that  time  was  in  favor  of 
enforcing  the  law.  I  had  nothing  said  to  me,  but  that  I  was  pursuing  a 
proper  and  laudable  course. 

Q.    Is  this  constabulary  force  popular  in  your  region  ? 


464  APPENDIX. 

A.  It  is.  I  think  that  the  people  are  in  favor  of  the  enforcement  of  the 
prohibitory  law.  The  constabulary  are  not  popular  with  the  dealers  ;  they 
are,  of  course,  very  unpopular  with  them. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     How  long  were  you  Mayor  ? 

A.     One  year. 

Q.     What  year  ? 

A.    1855. 

Q.     Were  you  in  the  Legislature  in  1852  ? 

A.    No,  sir.     I  was  in  the  Legislature  in  1856  and  1857. 

Q.     Were  you  in  favor  of  this  prohibitory  law  when  it  was  enacted  ? 

A.    I  was. 

Q.    But  was  not  in  the  Legislature  to  vote  for  it  ? 

A.    No,  sir.     I  do  not  know  that  I  signed  a  petition. 

Q.  Did  you  not  sign  a  petition  that  same  year,  for  a  law  empowering 
jurors  to  judge  of  the  law  as  well  as  the  fact,  in  criminal  cases  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  that  I  did. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  has  been  much  done  in  the  past  eleven  years,  in 
Springfield,  to  enforce  the  present  law  ? 

A.     There  has  not  been,  with  the  exception  of  the  two  years  I  mention. 

Q.     Then  for  nine  years  not  much  effort  was  made  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     And  not  as  much  as  there  ought  to  have  been  ? 

A .     I  think  not. 

Q.     Why  not  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  why ;  but  the  city  authorities  did  not  undertake  to 
enforce  the  law.  I  considered  it  my  duty  to  do  it  while  I  was  Mayor. 

Q,    It  was  manifest  to  the  people,  was  it  not  ? 

A .     I  think  so. 

Q.  But  the  people  let  nine  elections  run  by,  one  after  the  other,  without 
endeavoring  to  secure  its  enforcement  by  the  city  government  ? 

A.     We  used  to  stir  them  up  some. 

Q.  But  the  people  did  not  elect  persons  to  office  who  were  intent  upon 
enforcing  this  law  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Is  that  the  state  of  the  public  mind  in  Springfield  at  present  ? 

A.  Perhaps  I  can  give  a  little  light  upon  that  subject,  and  the  Committee 
can  draw  their  own  conclusions.  There  are  about  thirty-eight  hundred  names 
on  the  voting  lists  of  our  city, — a  little  over  that  number  I  think.  Two  years 
ago  there  was  but  one  candidate  up  for  Mayor,  and  he  received  about  seven 
hundred  votes.  Last  fall  at  the  elections  there  were  between  sixteen  hundred 
and  seventeen  hundred  votes  cast.  A  little  over  one  thousand  votes  were  cast 
for  Mayor  Briggs,  who  is  the  present  Mayor.  He  has  been  in  two  years,  and 
is  now  on  his  third  year.  I  believe  that  at  the  first  election  he  had  no  opposi- 
tion. At  the  second  and  third  elections  there  was  opposition,  but  his  friends 
were  stronger  than  those  who  were  against  him.  He  did  not,  however,  have 
half  the  vote  of  the  city.  What  the  particular  reason  was  I  will  not  under- 
take to  say. 

Q.     But  the  fact  is  as  you  have  stated  ? 


APPENDIX.  465 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  is  it  with  regard  to  the  other  large  towns  of  which  you  have 
knowledge  ? 

A.     In  regard  to  *vhat  ? 

Q.     Take  Westfield.     Do  they  sell  any  liquor  in  Westfield  ? 

A.  I  suppose  they  do.  I  understand  they  do,  but  I  do  not  know  the  fact. 
I  understand  that  the  liquor  agency  in  that  town  received  about  five  hundred 
dollars  last  year. 

Q.     Are  there  any  unlawful  sales  ? 

A .  I  do  not  know.  I  suppose,  however,  that  there  are  unlawful  sales.  I 
have  no  doubt  of  it. 

Q.  Has  the  law  been  successfully  enforced  in  Northampton,  and  other 
large  towns  ? 

A.  I  believe  that  there  has  been  considerable  stir  in  Northampton.  They 
had  a  temperance  meeting  last  year  and  made  a  wonderful  stir.  How  well 
they  succeeded  in  enforcing  the  law  I  do  not  know.  I  think  that  I  have  been 
told  that  they  succeeded  in  shutting  up  quite  a  number  of  liquor-shops. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  there  is  now  any  liquor  sold  unlawfully  in 
Northampton  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  that  there  is  any  sold  there.    I  suppose  that  there  is. 

Q.  Is  the  state  of  feeling  in  Springfield  different  from  what  it  is  in  other 
towns  of  your  section  of  the  State  in  respect  to  the  liquor  traffic  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  They  undoubtedly  come  from  other  towns  to  our 
town  a  good  deal  to  get  liquor.  There  are  a  great  many  dealers  there. 

Q.     Are  you  about  as  good,  in  respect  to  temperance,  as  your  neighbors  ? 

A.  I  suppose  there  are  more  drunkards  in  Springfield,  comparatively, 
than  any  other  towns  around  there. 

Q,    It  is  a  market  centre,  is  it  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  It  has  twenty-five  thousand  inhabitants,  and  the  people  come 
there  to  market  a  great  deal,  and  get  what  they  wish  ;  and  I  have  no  doubt 
they  buy  liquor. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  live  in  Hampshire  County  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  that  not  rather  an  exception  to  the  other  counties  of  the  State  in 
this  matter  ?  Did  they  not  grant  licenses  there  longer  than  in  any  other 
county,  when  they  had  the  option  of  granting  them  or  not  ? 

A.  When  the  County  Commissioners  granted  licenses,  I  remember  that  at 
their  last  meeting,  the  board  who  had  granted  the  licenses  were  lapped  over 
on  to  the  next  year,  upon  the  incoming  board,  for  it  was  supposed  that  the 
incoming  board  would  not  grant  licenses  ;  and  that  board  granted,  and  were 
lapped  over  one  year.  That  action  was  a  matter  of  great  complaint. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  whether  or  not  licenses  were  granted  in  that  county 
for  some  time,  when  they  were  not  granted  in  any  other  county  ? 

A.    I  recollect  that  there  was  a  good  deal  of  complaint  about  that. 

Adjourned. 

59 


466  APPENDIX. 


FOURTEENTH  DAY. 

THURSDAY,  March  14th,  1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  resumed  the  hearing  of  testi- 
mony. 

TESTIMONY  OF  FRAXCIS  D.  ELLIS. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)    Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.    In  West  Roxbury. 

Q.     And  do  business  in  Boston  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  lived  in  Roxbury  ? 

A.     About  twenty-six  years. 

Q.     Where  did  you  live  previous  to  that  ? 

A.  Medfield  is  my  native  place.  I  was  in  New  Hampshire  for  ten  or 
twelve  years. 

Q.    In  what  part  of  New  Hampshire  ? 

A.     The  town  of  Marlow. 

Q.     When  did  you  leave  Medfield  ? 

A.  In  1815.  I  lived  for  a  while  in  Sudbury,  and  then  went  to  New 
Hampshire,  and  returned  again  in  1833  or  1834  to  Medfield. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  have  you  give  the  condition  of  things  in  those  country 
towns  with  which  you  were  familiar  in  your  early  years  before  the  temperance 
reform  made  any  progress,  and  state  whether  things  are  worse  or  better  now 
than  then  ? 

A.  They  are  very  much  better.  I  have  some  facts  that  I  have  been 
refreshing  my  memory  with,  in  regard  to  those  towns  with  which  I  am 
familiar. 

Q.  State  what  you  know  of  the  town  of  Medfield, — what  you  have  seen 
and  heard  ? 

A.  We  had  in  the  town  of  Medfield  for  fifteen  years  but  one  tavern, 
•which  was  licensed  according  to  law.  We  had  two  stores  licensed  there  to 
sell  liquor.  I  was  thinking  this  morning  of  the  result  of  the  liquor  traffic 
upon  the  men  who  had  been  engaged  in  it  there.  I  have  heard  no  testimony 
here  to  that  point,  but  the  history  of  the  liquor  traffic  is  terrible  in  its  results 
upon  the  men  who  have  been  engaged  in  it.  In  the  town  of  Medfield  there 
had  been  but  one  tavern,  and  there  had  been  five  families  connected  with  that 
tavern  since  my  memory.  Three  out  of  five,  the  keeper  and  sons  in  one  instance, 
the  keeper  himself,  and  in  another  instance,  I  think,  the  wife,  became  drunk- 
ards. I  know  of  what  I  affirm.  Of  the  other  two,  one  man  took  the  tavern, 
,and  in  a  little  while  it  was  said  of  him  that  he  was  drinking  too  much.  Some 
friend  whispered  it  in  his  ear,  I  suppose'  and  he  quit  the  business  after  three 
imonths.  Another  man  took  the  tavern  and  kept  it  up  to  the  time  his  liquor 


APPENDIX.  467 

was  taken  from  him,  and  he  was  saved  from  going,  to  a  drunkard's  grave ;  but 
his  sons  died  drunkards,  and  he  was  on  the  way  very  fast. 

Q.     When  did  he  leave  ? 

A.  After  prohibition  took  place  there.  I  would  say  that  we  had  prohibi- 
tion in  that  county  before  the  prohibitory  law  was  enacted.  We  had  it 
by  the  towns  voting  that  the  selectmen  should  not  recommend  anybody  to  be 
licensed,  after  which  we  secured  prohibition  by  the  County  Commissioners 
choosing  a  party  who  would  not  license  anybody  in  the  county.  There  was 
one  grocery  there ;  the  father  (who  kept  it  in  my  boyhood,)  tottled  into  a 
drunkard's  grave.  The  first  and  second  sons  took  the  store,  and  died  in  the 
same  way.  The  third  one  learned  a  trade,  but  became  a  drunkard  and  died. 
The  last  and  fourth  son  kept  the  store,  and  went  down  into  a  drunkard's 
grave.  About  the  year  1830,  and  soon  after  the  temperance  reform  com- 
menced, I  was  in  New  Hampshire  with  a  friend,  and  we  went  into  an 
examination  of  the  results  of  the  traffic"  upon  the  men  who  had  been 
engaged  in  it.  We  went  into  forty  towns  and  examined  the  condition  of  the 
families  of  as  many  tavern-keepers,  and  how  many  do  you  suppose  out  those 
tavern-keepers,  or  their  children,  or  their  wives,  became  drunkards  ?  Thirty ! 

Q.     Thirty  out  of  forty  ? 

A.  Thirty  out  of  forty  tavern-keepers.  Those  were  country  taverns.  I 
know  nothing  about  the  results  of  the  traffic  in  cities.  We  became  satisfied 
that  the  business  was  a  terrible  business.  I  had  two  partners  with  me.  I 
sold  liquor  under  a  license. 

Q.    InMedfield? 

A.  In  Medfield.  There  was  a  young  man  in  Medfield  wno  was  licensed, 
and  I  also  sold  in  Medfield  without  a  license,  and  in  Sudbury  with  a  license ; 
and  afterwards  I  sold  in  New  Hampshire.  I  had  in  the  course  of  this  year 
two  partners,  both  of  whom  died  drunkards.  Such,  according  to  my  o\vn 
observation,  are  the  results  upon  the  men  engaged  in  the  liquor  traffic.  The 
only  wonder  is  that  anybody  dare  take  a  license.  It  seems  as  if  the  terrible 
woe  quoted  from  the  Bible,  is  already  realized  by  the  people  there. 

Q.  What  was  the  effect  upon  the  people  in  Medfield,— were  there  drunk- 
ards there  ? 

A.  I  do  not  want  to  speak  evil  of  my  native  town,  but  it  was  a  very 
drunken  place.  Almost  everybody  drank  liquor  there, — men,  women  and 
children.  The  exceptions  were  very  rare  indeed.  Some  of  them  drank  a 
great  deal. 

Q.     Were  there  many  who  were  termed  drunkards  in  those  days  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  there  were  men  who  would  then  be  considered  drunkards. 
There  were  about  forty  drunkards  in  the  town  of  Medfield,  out  of  about  125 
voters.  They  were  not  all  voters,  but  principally  so.  A  great  many  more, 
almost  everybody,  I  may  say,  were  occasionally  what  is  called  "  tipsy.'*  That 
was  the  condition  of  the  people  of  that  town  with  respect  to  drunkenness. 

Q.    Now  they  would  be  called  intemperate  ? 

A.  They  would  be.  They  were  not  called  even  moderate  drinkers  then, 
but  now  they  would  be  called  intemperate. 

Q.  Was  the  law  then  in  force  requiring  them  to  post  up  their  drunkards, 
so  that  the  sellers  should  not  sell  to  them  ? 


468  APPENDIX. 

A.  Yes,  sir.  The  selectmen  used  to,  annually,  (I  believe  that  was  the 
law,)  give  a  list  to  be  posted  up  in  the  places  where  liquor  was  sold,  of  such 
persons  as  were  liable  to  become  town-paupers  by  intemperance.  That  list 
was  posted  up,  and  to  the  men  upon  that  list  we  were  forbidden  to  sell.  That 
list  in  our  town  became  pretty  large. 

Q.     Have  you  any  idea  how  large  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  could  not  now  tell  the  number;  but  it  was  so  large  that  it 
was  sometimes  mistaken  for  another  list. 

Q.    What  list  ? 

A.  The  list  of  voters.  I  recollect  in  one  instance  a  man  from  a  neighbor- 
ing town,  stepping  around  and  reading  the  notices  that  were  stuck  up  upon  a 
board,  ran  upon  that,  and  after  reading  the  names,  looked  at  the  head  of  it, 
and  said  in  surprise,  "  I  certainly  thought  that  was  the  list  of  votenj,  but  find 
that  it  is  not." 

Q.    In  what  town  was  that  ?  * 

A.     In  Medfield. 

Q.     Did  they  used  to  send  a  good  deal  of  liquor  from  Boston  there  ? 

A .     There  was  a  great  deal  sold  there. 

Q.     You  used  to  have  a  great  deal  of  rye-whiskey,  I  suppose  ? 

A-,  Not  very  much  of  that;  but  there  was  a  great  deal  of  New  England 
rum  and  other  spirits  sold.  I  have  been  astonished  at  hearing  people  say 
there  was  as  much  liquor  drank  now  as  then.  I  can  assure  you  that  anybody 
acquainted  with  the  facts,  would  not  say  that.  I  question  whether  there  is 
one  gallon  drank  in  that  town  to-day,  where  there  were  twenty  gallons  drank 
then, — I  do  not  think  there  is  anything  like  one  gallon  to  twenty. 

Q.     Are  you  familiar  with  the  town  of  Medfield  now  ? 

A .  I  am.  It  is  one  of  the  most  pleasant  towns  in  the  Commonwealth 
of  Massachusetts.  It  is  a  beautiful  town.  Those  men  who  used  to  be  lying 
around  there  drunk,  are  now  mostly  gone.  It  is  a  very  nourishing  and  thriv; 
ing  place.  There  is  no  liquor  to  be  bought  there  now,  and  there  are  no 
drunkards  in  sight.  I  suppose  there  may  be  some  liquor  drank.  There  are 
a  few  foreign  families  in  the  place,  and  it  is  said  that  they  do  use  some  liquor  ; 
but  I  believe  that  the  native  population  of  that  town  are  as  free  from  the 
habit  as  any  community  in  this  world.  I  do  not  believe  that  a  decent  man 
can  buy  it  in  Medfield,  at  any  rate.  I  inquired  of  a  liquor  agent  about  the 
quantity  he  sold,  and  he  said  that  he  did  not  sell  any.  "  Does  not  anybody 
buy  of  you  ?  "  "  Well,  I  sell  a  few  gallons  per  year,  perhaps."  Of  the  town 
of  Sudbury,  in  which  I  kept,  I  do  not  know  as  much  as  Medfield.  I  lived 
there  for  some  years.  There  was  a  great  deal  of  liquor  drank  in  Sudbury  at 
that  time.  There  were  four  taverns  licensed  in  the  town,  and  there  were 
three  men  in  the  town  who  kept  variety  stores.  They  all  had  licenses  to  sell 
liquor.  They  sold  a  great  deal  there.  I  recollect  that  in  one  month  in  that 
town,  (in  haying-time,)  we  retailed  nine  hogsheads  of  New  England  rum, 
besides  other  spirits.  The  population  at  that  time  was  probably  fifteen 
hundred  or  two  thousand. 

Q.     Nine  hogshead  in  a  £ear  ? 

A.  Nine  hogsheads  in  a  month,  besides  other  spirits  ;  and  the  other  taverns 
were  in  full  blast  at  the  same  time.  There  was  a  great  deal  of  teaming  to 


APPENDIX.  469 

other  places,  to  the  adjoining  towns,  to  market,  and  a  great  deal  of  liquor  was 
brought  in  from  those  towns.  The  consumption  of  liquor  was  enormous.  It 
is  surprising  to  hear  people  say  that  as  much  liquor  is  used  now  as  then.  I 
should  think  there  was  not  a  hundredth  part  of  it  drank  now  that  there  was 
then  in  that  town.  In  those  towns  now,  none  of  the  people  drink  liquor 
as  a  beverage.  I  do  not  know  of  a  man  there  who  uses  it  as  a  beverage.  To 
be  sure,  my  old  acquaintances  have  passed  away,  and  I  am  not  as  familiar 
with  the  habits  of  the  people  as  I  used  to  be  ;  but  what  acquaintances  I  now 
have  do  not  drink  rum,  nor  any  intoxicating  liquor. 

Q.     In  what  year  was  it  that  you  speak  of  retailing  nine  hogsheads  ? 

A.     It  must  have  been  in  1819. 

Q.     Do  you  know  the  state  of  things  in  Sudbury  now  ? 

A .  I  am  not  so  thoroughly  acquainted  with  the  condition  of  things  there 
now  as  I  am  with  Medfield.  I  know  men  there  who  drink  no  liquor.  I 
knew  that  they  do  not  all  drink  as  they  used  to  do.  I  am  also  familiar  with 
the  town  of  Foxborough.  That  town  furnishes  a  most  striking  illustration  of 
the  condition  of  things  under  a  license  law,  as  contrasted  with  the  condition 
of  things  under  a  prohibitory  law.  That  was  a  miserable,  drunken  town. 
The  village  then  consisted  of  a  little  mean  tavern,  a  red  church,  a  little  red 
grocery  store,  and  one  or  two  houses.  Around  that  tavern  was  almost  always 
to  be  found  clustered  such  a  company  of  men  as  no  decent  men  would  like  to 
see  ;  most  of  them  usually  about  "  half  seas  over."  They  were  drunken  and 
dirty,  and  everything  which  you  can  think  of  as  filthy,  belonged  to  them. 
That  continued  to  be  the  condition  of  things  until  the  time  that  we  were 
enabled  in  some  way  or  other  to  get  prohibition  in  that  county.  Then  the 
people  saw  the  evils  they  were  coming  to,  and  rose  up  and  said,  "  We 
will  have  no  more  liquor  sold  in  this  town ;  "  and  there  has  been  none  sold  to 
any  man  since.  I  beg  gentlemen  to  go  and  look  at  that  town  if  they  want  an 
illustration  of  the  benefits  that  rise  from  the  absence  of  liquor.  Foxborough  is 
now  one  of  the  most  prosperous,  thriving,  splendid  villages  we  have  in  the 
county  of  Norfolk. 

Q-  In  the  town  of  Medfield,  you  spoke  of  one  tavern  and  of  several 
stores  that  sold  liquor.  Were  they  all  licensed  ? 

A.     They  were. 

Q.  Nobody  sold  without  a  license,  I  suppose,  because  everybody  was 
licensed  who  wanted  to  sell  ? 

A.     Nobody  sold  without  a  license,  because  everybody  could  get  licensed. 

Q.     Did  they  all  retail  by  the  glass  ? 

A .  For  a  time  they  did.  Afterwards,  I  think  there  was  some  restriction 
put  in  the  law,  so  that  they  had  to  obtain  licenses  as  retailers  and  not  as 
tavern-keepers. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  sentiment  of  the  people  in  those  towns  at  present 
about  prohibition  ? 

A.  I  do  not,  sir  ;  but  my  judgment  is  that  there  would  be  but  one  mind 
there.  There  would  be  but  very  few  exceptions.  I  should  judge  that  they 
were  very  much  in  favor  of  prohibition  —  in  fact,  I  know  the  majority  of 
them  are. 


470  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  else  in  connection  with  this  subject  that  you  would 
like  to  say  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know,  sir,  as  there  is.  I  very  much  hope  that  the  gentlemen 
of  this  Committee  and  the  members  of  this  Legislature  will  not  pass  a  law 
licensing  the  sale  of  liquor  again.  I  hope  they  will  not,  for  I  think  these 
instances  with  which  I  am  familiar  illustrate  the  evils  that  have  been 
brought  upon  most  of  our  country  towns  by  the  business  of  selling  liquor.  I 
think  I  have  given  a  fair  illustration.  The  change  in  most  of  our  country 
towns,  because  of  prohibition,  is  as  happy,  I  think,  as  in  those  I  have  men- 
tioned. In  a  town  in  New  Hampshire,  I  sold  liquor  for  several  years.  The 
results  there  were  the  same.  In  Medfield  we  had  a  great  poor  tax  at  that 
time.  The  pauper  tax  was  very  large,  now  it  is  very  small.  I  know  farmers 
there  who  forty  years  ago  could  hardly  make  both  ends  meet,  who  are  now 
prosperous  and  happy.  They  have  brightened  up  their  houses,  and  everything 
looks  clean  and  pleasant.  Some  parties  have  become  wealthy  there.  Forty 
years  ago  there  was  not  a  man  who  could  become  rich  in  that  town,  but  now 
all  are  thrifty,  and  some  are  becoming  wealthy. 

(2-     And  the  people  generally  are  in  a  comfortable  position  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  They  have  no  poor  tax  comparatively  to  pay.  Forty  years 
ago  there  were  petty  law-suits  continually  going  on  ;  lawyers  found  employ- 
ment there  in  petty,  annoying  suits.  I  recollect  at  one  time,  just  before  the 
town  meeting  was  adjourned,  an  old  gentleman  got  up  and  said, "  Mr.  Moder- 
ator, there  is  one  thing  we  have  not  attended  to."  "  What  is  that  ?  "  "  We 
have  not  chosen  our  annual  witnesses  —  witnesses  to  appear  in  court  upon 
every  case.  We  have  not  chosen  any  of  them." 

Q.     They  were  very  tenacious  of  their  personal  rights,  I  suppose  ? 

A.  There  was  a  great  deal  of  contention  about  little  things.  In  the  town 
of  Marlow,  N.  II.,  where  I  was,  there  were  a  good  many  farmers  that  abso- 
lutely swallowed  down  their  farms  in  drinking,  and  thereby  destroyed  the 
happiness  of  their  families. 

Q.     Have  you  observed  much  about  the  state  of  things  here  in  Boston  ? 

A.  I  have  been  an  observer,  sir.  I  have  taken  a  great  deal  of  interest 
(since  I  have  given  up  the  sale  of  liquor),  in  this  matter. 

Q.  Do  you  begin  yet  to  see  any  effect  from  the  enforcement  of  the 
prohibitory  law  ? 

A.     I  think  we  do  within  a  year  past. 

Q.     How  does  it  manifest  itself? 

A.  I  stepped  into  a  very  respectable  saloon  where  I  used  to  go  and  buy 
bread,  (not  for  any  other  purpose.)  I  found  that  the  liquor  was  absent.  I 
rejoiced  and  told  the  keeper  that  I  was  glad  of  it.  I  learned  that  it  was 
missing  because  the  State  Constable  was  coming  there,  and  he  had  put  it  out  of 
the  way  to  be  sold  no  more  ;  he  had  put  it  entirely  out  of  the  way  and  stopped 
the  business.  I  noticed  another  place  where  I  knew  it  was  sold  formerly  by 
the  glass,  but  where  it  is  not  sold  now.  I  have  not  witnessed,  as  I  did  years 
ago,  drunkenness  in  the  streets.  I  think  that  during  the  war  there  was  an 
increase  of  intemperance ;  but  I  think  that  now,  since  the*  work  of  really 
stopping  the  sale  has  commenced,  there  is  a  great  decrease  in  the  amount  of 
intemperance.  In  the  instances  of  which  I  speak,  I  am  very  confident  that 


APPENDIX.  471 

nothing  but  the  absence  of  liquor  has  reduced  the  amount  of  drunkenness 
and  promoted  the  prosperity  of  the  people.  I  believe  that  to  be  the  sole 
cause.  I  believe  that  just  so  far  as  the  sale  of  liquor  is  diminished  in  this 
city,  just  so  fast  will  drunkenness  be  diminished. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  At  what  time  did  the  temperance  reform,  in  the 
town  you  have  referred  to,  begin  ? 

A.  At  the  time  of  the  commencement  of  the  reformation  I  was  in  New 
Hampshire,  but  I  think  that  it  begun  about  the  year  1828  or  1829. 

Q.     What  were  the  means  employed  for  the  reformation  ? 

A.  It  was  gathering  up  the  facts, — the  showing,  as  I  have  attempted  to 
show  here,  the  results  of  intemperance. 

Q,.    Were  frequent  meetings  held  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  and  lectures.  I  recollect  the  Journal  of  Humanity,  the 
first  temperance  paper  published  In  this  State.  I  recollect  that  that  paper 
and  Dr.  Hewctt's  efforts  in  New  Hampshire,  produced  considerable  effect. 

Q.  How  long  after  the  commencement  of  these  efforts  was  it,  before  there 
was  any  perceptible  change  ? 

A.  When  I  returned  from  New  Hampshire,  after  an  absence  of  fifteen 
years  from  my  native  town,  I  found  the  same  habits  among  the  people  as  when 
I  left.  There  may  have  been  a  diminution  of  intemperance,  and  perhaps 
there  was  ;  perhaps  they  were  beginning  to  see  the  evils  of  intemperance.  I 
returned  in  1833,  and  we  stopped  the  sale  of  liquors  I  think,  in  our  town, 
about  the  year  1837  or  1838. 

Q.     Was  it  stopped  by  the  voluntary  voting  of  the  people  of  that  town  ? 

A.  After  considerable  effort  we  secured  a  vote  of  the  people,  instructing 
the  selectmen  not  to  license. 

Q.  When  did  this  marked  change  which  has  since  continued,  seem  to 
reach  its  full  effect, — at  what  period  ? 

A.  We  began  to  see  its  effects  the  moment  we  took  the  liquor  away  from 
the  hotels,  more  clearly  than  ever  before.  A  man  continued  to  keep  the 
hotel  in  that  place  for  a  while,  but  he  did  not  sell  liquor.  This  was  about  the 
time  of  which  I  just  spoke, — 1837  or  1838. 

Q,  As  the  reformation  progressed,  how  long  was  it  before  the  face  of 
things  became  fully  changed  ? 

A,  Well,  sir,  there  were  men  there  who  continued  to  drink  even  after  we 
took  this  liquor  away,  and  some  of  them  who  had  formerly  drank,  were 
reformed.  I  know  several  men  in  that  town,  who  were  intemperate  men,  and 
were  hastening  down  to  drunkards'  graves,  were  saved,  and  merely  because 
the  liquor  was  taken  away  from  them  and  they  were  not  tempted  by  it. 

Q.     What  was  the  state  of  things  in  1849  and  1850  ? 

A.     They  were  prosperous. 

Q.     The  drinking  usages  of  the  people  had  very  much  changed  by  1850  ? 

A.  After  we  got  prohibition  they  changed.  The  change  began  as  soon 
as  the  liquor  was  taken  from  the  place. 

Q.     Does  Foxborough  join  Medfield  ? 

A.     No,  sir  ?  but  I  was  also  familiar  in  Foxborough. 

Q.  In  1850  the  change  seemed  to  have  been  wrought  from  these  previous 
efforts  ? 


472  APPENDIX. 

A.  Men  were  becoming  satisfied  that  they  could  do  without  drink.  Inas- 
much as  they  could  not  get  it  conveniently,  they  began  to  find  they  could  do 
without  it. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  the  force  of  any  law,  unaided  by  any  other 
efforts,  could  have  produced  that  result  ? 

A .    No,  sir.     I  look  upon  the  law  itself  as  the  result  of  moral  effort. 

Q.  And  in  regard  to  whatever  legislation  may  be  resorted  to,  that  legis- 
lation you  would  deem  the  best  that  would  most  effectually  check  intem- 
perance, would  you  not  ? 

A .     Certainly  I  would. 

Q.  This  reformation,  then,  according  to  your  testimony,  seems  to  have 
reached  its  full  realization  before  the  passage  of  the  law  which  is  now  the 
subject  of  investigation  ? 

A.     It  had  been  gradually  coming  to  that. 

Q.  During  the  period  that  the  towns  acted  on  the  subject  of  granting 
licenses,  I  take  it  the  subject  was  brought  before  the  people  there  directly  or 
indirectly  at  almost  every  town  meeting  ? 

A.  We  had  several  contests  about  it.  We  finally  procured  a  victory  by 
dividing  the  house. 

Q.  The  discussions  that  annually  occurred  prior  to  the  town  meeting, 
tended  to  keep  alive  the  temperance  feeling  in  the  community  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  the  prohibitory  law  was  passed  and  there  was  no  longer  any 
need  of  those  discussions,  the  discussions  and  lectures  ceased,  did  they  not  ? 

A.     Unfortunately  they  did,  to  a  great  extent. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  after  the  passage  cf  the  prohibitory  law,  did  not 
those  efforts  by  means  of  discussions  .and  lectures  cease,  to  a  very  great 
extent  ? 

A .  Yes,  sir,  I  think  they  did.  I  think  too  many  men  were  satisfied  with 
what  had  been  accomplished  in  securing  the  passage  of  the  law,  and  that  they 
had  nothing  more  to  do. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  leaving  off  of  those  discussions  was  an  injury  to 
the  cause  of  temperance  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Your  opinion,  then,  is  that  this  reformation  can  never  become  perfectly 
complete,  or  the  vantage  ground  gained,  but  by  constant  vigilance,  by  discus- 
sions of  the  facts,  and  constant  efforts  among  the  people  ? 

A.  My  own  observation  has  been  that  discussion,  resulting  in  law,  produced 
the  change.  I  believe  the  law  finished  up  what  the  discussion  could  not  fully 
accomplish. 

Q.  The  law  was  the  result  of  discussion, — the  discussion  preceded  the  law, 
and  when  the  law  was  obtained  the  discussion  ceased  ? 

A.    In  a  measure. 

Q.  When  that  discussion  ceased,  the  cause  of  temperance  did  not  advance 
as  it  had  before  ?  I  ask  the  question  as  a  matter  of  fact. 

A.  There  seemed,  in  the  towns  of  which  I  speak,  not  much  to  do  after 
that. 

Q.     And  was  the  same  true  of  other  towns  ? 


APPENDIX.  473 

A.    I  suppose  so. 

Q.  When  that  discussion  ceased,  did  it  not  cease  all  through  the  State,  to 
a  very  great  extent  ? 

A.    I  think  it  did,  in  a  measure. 

Q.  Has  it  not  diminished  compared  with  what  it  was  from  1825  to  1840  ? 
Comparing  the  last  fifteen  years  with  that  period,  was  there  not  far  less  active 
co-operation  and  discussion  of  the  facts  than  there  was  during  the  fifteen 
years  prior  ? 

A.  I  think  there  has  been  ;  but  it  strikes  me  there  is  more  discussion  than 
there  has  been  for  the  past  few  years. 

Q.  What  is  that  discussion  upon — the  enforcement  of  the  law,  or  the 
great  fundamental  moral  principle  upon  which  the  law  is  founded  ? 

A.    I  think  on  both. 

Q.     But  which  has  had  the  highest  place  in  this  discussion  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  working  of  the  new  processes  of  the  law  has  induced 
discussion  upon  the  great  principles  of  temperance. 

Q.  Then,  so  far  as  Boston  and  other  places  are  concerned,  the  ceasing  of 
that  discussion  and  of  moral  efforts,  consequent  upon  the  passage  of  the  pro- 
hibitory law,  proved  unfortunate  to  the  progress  of  the  cause  of  temperance  ? 

A.    It  has  not  been  sustained  as  it  ought  to  have  been. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  of  the  drinking  usages  of  the  community  during 
the  last  fifteen  years,  compared  with  what  they  were  during  the  fifteen  years 
prior— say  from  1830  to  1845  ? 

A.  I  think  that  some  classes  of  the  people  drink  more  now  than  they 
did  twenty  years  ago, 

Q.  Has  not  the  use  of  liquor  as  a  beverage  for  the  purposes  of  conviviality 
been  increasing  in  the  community  ? 

A.    Not  among  my  acquaintances. 

Q.     Do  you  understand  that  it  has  among  any  class  ? 

A.  I  hear  men  assert  it;  I  cannot  speak  from  my  own  knowledge.  Very 
few  of  my  acquaintances  drink  any. 

Q.  Did  that  system  of  licensing,  or  not  licensing,  according  to  the  action 
of  the  towns,  operate  very  well  ? 

A.     It  created  a  great  deal  of  discussion  on  the  subject. 

Q.  Was  not  that  discussion  and  the  lectures  and  the  bringing  of  the  ques- 
tion of  responsibility  upon  the  people  of  the  town  at  the  annual  elections, 
very  effective  in  promoting  the  reform  ? 

A.    Yes,  altogether,  they  were. 

Q.     As  a  whole,  I  mean  ;  I  put  them  altogether  ? 

A.  As  a  whole  they  were  ;  and  I  was  about  to  say  in  this  work  we  had 
almost  to  fight.  It  was  for  a  time  dangerous  for  a  man  to  attempt  to  lecture 
upon  the  subject  of  temperance. 

Q.  But  after  this  discussion,  after  you  were  brought  by  this  discussion  to 
take  the  responsibility  of  closing  the  shops,  it  was  different  ? 

A.  It  was  different  after  the  liquor  was  removed.  But  we  found  that  we 
had  a  pretty  powerful  enemy  to  contend  with. 

Q.    But  the  closing  of  the  shops,  consequent  upon  this  discussion,  etc., 
produced  very  great  results  ? 
60 


474  APPENDIX. 

A.     You  must  judge  for  yourself  about  that. 

Q.  Do  you  observe  anything  in  the  system  of  measures  then  used  which 
led  to  the  action  of  the  towns  in  closing  the  shops, — is  there  anything  wanting 
in  that  system  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  great  object  ? 

A.     We  felt  that  the  great  object  was  to  get  rid  of  the  liquor. 

Q.     And  you  got  rid  of  it  in  that  way  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Did  you  see  that  any  thing -further  was  wanting  ? 

A.     To  get  rid  of  the  liquor  was  what  we  most  wanted. 

Q.     You  got  all  you  wanted,  then  ? 

A.  Yes,  after  we  were  free  of  the  liquor.  The  town  continued  to 
labor  with  the  people  who  were  in  the  habit  of  drinking,  to  get  them  to  give 
it  up. 

Q.    You  spoke  of  Foxborough.     What  is  the  population  of  that  town  ? 

A.     I  am  not  able  to  say.    It  has  increased  very  much  since  that  time. 

Q.     You  regard  it  as  a  prosperous,  thriving  town  ? 

A.     It  is  a  very  thriving  town. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  the  results  of  the  temperance  reformation,  in  the 
change  that  was  wrought  upon  the  people,  were  as  great  in  the  town  of  Fox- 
borough  as  in  Medfield  ? 

A .    I  consider  that  a  fair  sample. 

Q.  What  would  you  say  if  the  State  agent  in  the  town  of  Foxborough 
had  been  selling  every  year  from  $1,500  to  $2,000  worth  of  liquor,  and  every 
year  increasing  the  sale  ? 

A.  I  should  say  that  it  was  more  than  I  expected.  At  the  same  time,  I 
should  say  that  it  was  not  a  hundredth  part  of  what  was  formerly  sold. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  in  1864  they  sold  $1,446  worth  of  liquor  at  that  town 
agency  ? 

A.     I  have  made  no  inquiries  about  that. 

Q.     Or  that  in  1865  they  sold  to  the  amount  of  $1,939.20  ? 

A.     I  know  nothing  about  it. 

Q.     Or  that  last  year  they  sold  $2,170  worth  in  the  town  of  Foxborough  ? 

A.     I  was  not  aware  of  it. 

Q.  Had  you  known  those  facts,  would  it  have  modified  at  all  your  opinion 
as  to  the  success  of  the  law  in  checking  the  use  and  sale  of  liquor  in  that 
town  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  it  would.  I  form  my  opinion  by  looking  at  the 
town.  I  knew  how  it  looked  then  and  I  know  how  it  looks  now. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  the  city  of  Boston.  You  think  within  the  last  year 
intemperance  has  diminished  in  this  city,  as  I  understand  you  ? 

A.     I  do  not  see  as  much  of  it  as  I  did  formerly. 

Q.  Have  you  any  means  of  observation  in  regard  to  that  as  would  enable 
you  to  form  a  correct  opinion  ? 

A.  I  form  my  opinion  from  my  own  observations.  I  pass  through  the 
streets  two  or  three  times  per  day,  and  I  used  to  see  more  drunkenness  in  the 
than  I  do  now. 

Q.  Have  you  examined  in  reference  to  this  subject  the  reports  of  the 
police? 


APPENDIX.  47i 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Would  not  a  law  leaving  the  subject  of  the  sale  of  liquor  to  be  acted 
upon  by  the  several  towns  be  satisfactory  to  you  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  it  would  not.  It  would  carry  endless  contention  into  the 
towns. 

Q.     And  endless  discussion  also  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Would  not  that  be  desirable  ? 

A.  It  would  stir  up  contention,  and  it  would  stir  up  bad  blood  also.  I 
would  not  have  bad  blood  stirred  up. 

Q.  You  laid  aside  your  discussion  on  the  enactment  of  the  prohibitory 
law,  but  you  have  not  overcome  the  evil  ? 

A.  Pauperism  has  diminished;  crime  has  diminished;  prosperity  has 
increased. 

Q.  Your  recommendation,  then,  of  the  present  prohibitory  law,  is  that  it 
relieves  the  public  from  these  discussions  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  The  recommendation  of  the  law  is  that  it  will  relieve  the 
distresses  of  a  great  many  families. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  with  all  this  discussion,  all  these  moral  efforts  laid 
aside,  that  any  law  will  execute  itself,  however  stringent  the  law  or  vigilant 
the  officers,  unless  it  is  sustained  by  public  opinion  ? 

A.     No,  sir,  I  do  not. 

Q.  If  I  understand  you  rightly,  you  want  the  law  that  will  most  effectual!} 
check  the  evils  of  intemperance  ? 

A.     That  is  the  great  object. 

Q.  You  do  not  believe  it  would  be  wrong  for  a  farmer  in  Medfield  to  buy  a 
couple  of  quarts  of  cider — you  would  not  consider  it  a  sin  for  him  to  have  it  ? 

A.     I  think  it  would  be  a  sin  for  a  man  to  sell  liquor  as  a  drink. 

Q.    I  ask  you  about  cider  ? 

A.     I  refer  to  anything  that  makes  a  man  a  beast. 

Q.     Do  you  regard  it  as  a  sin  in  itself  to  sell  liquor  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is  forbidden.  I  quit  the  sale  of  liquor,  conscientiouslj 
believing  it  to  be  wrong. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  it  is  wrong  to  sell  a  glass  of  liquor  under  an}- 
circumstances  ? 

A.  I  think  that  its  use  is  authorized,  for  instance,  in  the  case  of  a  man 
who  is  about  dying.  If  I  found  a  man  who  was  about  dying,  and.  nothing  else 
would  save  him,  I  should  get  it  for  him. 

Q.     Would  you  buy  it  ? 

A .     I  should  get  it  if  I  could. 

Q.     You  would  buy  it,  then,  would  you  not  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know.     I  have  not  bought  any  lately. 

Q.     But  you  would  buy  it,  nevertheless  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  under  such  circumstances  I  should  have  to  buy  it  or 
steal  it,  for  I  have  none  of  it,  and  have  not  had  for  a  great  many  years. 

Q.     Which  do  you  think  worse, — buying  or  selling  ? 

A.    I  have  not  had  any  in  my  house. 


476  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  under  those  circumstances  the  buying  of  liquor 
and  the  giving  of  it  to  a  man  ready  to  die  is  a  sin  ? 

A.  I  think  you  understand  my  answer  to  that  question.  My  testimony 
would  be,  that  I  think  it  positively  wrong  for  a  man  to  do  a  business  that  is 
sinful. 

Q.  But  in  this  single  case,  do  you  believe  that  it  would  be  wrong  to  buy  a 
glass  of  liquor  for  the  purpose  of  which  you  have  spoken  ? 

A.     Is  it  necessary  that  I  should  answer  that  question  ? 

Q.     I  would  like  to  have  your  opinion,  if  you  have  formed  any  ? 

A.  I  have  never  formed  any  opinion,  for  I  never  had  such  a  case  as  that 
come  up. 

Q.  The  State  under  the  prohibitory  law  maintains  agencies  in  the  differ- 
ent towns  for  the  sale  of  liquor.  Do  you  think  that  is  right  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  may  be  a  good  provision  if  properly  observed,  but  I 
would  banish  the  whole  stuff  from  the  world. 

Q.     What  do  you  think  of  this  State  agency  business  ? 

A.     I  think  it  works  very  well  where  they  have  true  men. 

Q.     As  as  general  rule  ? 

A.     As  a  general  rule  I  think  it  works  very  well. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  Foxborough  a  while  ago,  and  stated  the  number  of  gal- 
lons sold  there  for  the  last  few  years.  There  may  be  a  great  deal  of  sickness 
in  Foxborough  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  how  that  is. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  sickness  in  Foxborough  during  one  year  required 
197  gallons  of  Holland  gin  ? 

A.  There  may  have  been  other  purposes  for  which  it  is  used.  There  is  a 
good  deal  of  manufacturing  going  on  there. 

Q.  There  were  $1,427.22  worth  of  whiskey  sold.  Do  you  think  the  manu- 
factures or  the  sickness  of  Foxborough  required  that  ? 

A.  I  notice  that  the  physicians  recommend  whiskey  very  much  more  than 
they  formerly  did.  They  now  use  it  in  lung  complaints.  They  used  to  say 
that  it  was  hurtful.  Now  they  consider  it  as  useful. 

Q.  Are  you  opposed  to  allowing  an  apothecary  to  sell  liquor  on  a  pre- 
scription of  a  physician  ? 

A.  I  will  state  my  own  case.  Coming  up  from  a  fever,  a  physician  pre- 
scribed brandy  for  me.  I  told  him  that  I  had  conscientious  scruples  about 
taking  it,  and  wished  he  would  give  me  something  else.  He  knowing  my 
feelings,  said'  to  some  of  my  neighbors,  "  I  will  get  the  Maine  Law  down  Mr. 
Ellis  yet."  I  dismissed  him.  I  would  not  take  brandy  to  save  my  life,  and  I 
found  another  physician  who  could  save  me  without  my  taking  brandy.  . 

Q.  It  seems  that  all  your  friends  in  Foxborough  would  not  die  rather  than 
take  it? 

A.     No,  sir  ;  I  suppose  not. 

Q.    You  say  that  you  think  that  every  sale  of  liquor  is  a  sin. 

A.     Did  I  say  that  ? 

Q.     I  so  understood  you. 

A.     I  believe  I  said  that  the  selling  of  liquor  as  a  business  was  sinful. 

Q.     Then  you  do  not  say  that  every  sale  of  liquor  is  sinful  ? 


APPENDIX.  477 

A.  I  grant  that  it  is  not  a  sin  for  these  State  agencies  to  sell  liquor  for 
proper  purposes. 

Q.  Where  do  we  get  at  the  principle  by  which  we  are  to  settle  what  is 
sin  and  what  is  not — do  we  get  it  from  the  law  of  God,  or  from  an  Act  of  the 
Legislature  of  Massachusetts  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  petitioners  in  this  case  ask  the  Legislature  to  do  that 
which  the  Almighty  condems.  "  Woe  unto  the  man  who  puts  the  bottle  to 
his  neighbor's  lips  !  "  It  seems  to  me  that  they  are  asking  something  that  the 
Almighty  disapproves.  I  call  that  sinful. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  if  the  same  woe  does  not  apply  to  the  State  agency  of 
Massachusetts  ? 

A.     I  think  not. 

Q.  Then  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts  can  vary  the  law  of  God  in 
this  matter  ? 

A.     I  think  not. 

Q.     And  nullify  the  woe  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q-  Suppose  that  a  man  be  sick  in  a  town  in  which  there  is  no  State 
Agent  for  the  sale  of  liquor ;  would  it  be  a  sin  for  him  to  obtain  liquor  from 
any  other  source  ? 

A .  It  would  be  a  sin  for  me  to  take  liquor  when  a  substitute  could  be 
found. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  it  would  be  a  sin  for  every  man  ?  Your 
opinions  and  conscientious  convictions  enter  into  the  character  of  your  own 
act ;  other  people  may  think  differently  ;  would  it  be  a  sin  for  them  to  buy 
or  use  ? 

A.    I  think  not. 

Q.    Then  it  would  not  be  a  sin  to  sell  under  those  circumstances  ? 

A.    It  would  be  for  me. 

Q.     But  would  it  be  for  everybody  ? 

A.     There  is  a  prohibition. 

Q.  You  have  said  that  it  would  not  be.  Now  do  you  claim  that  the 
Legislature  of  Massachusetts  has  the  right  to  make  that  a  sin,  which  is  not  a 
sin  ?  I  am  not  now  on  the  question  of  opinion  ;  that  is  another  thing. 

A .  I  do  not  think  that  you  have  a  right  to  do  that,  which  though  it  may 
not  be  a  sin  in  itself,  will  cause  others  to  sin. 

Q.     When  did  you  leave  oif  the  sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.  About  1830  ;  in  the  early  stages  of  the  temperance  reform.  I  left  the 
business  against  the  wishes  of  all  my  townsmen. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  You  stated  that  the  legislation  on  this  subject 
was  the  result  of  the  investigations  and  discussions  that  preceded  the  law  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  after  the  present  law  was  enacted  this  discussion  measurably 
ceased  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    You  consider  that  that  was  a  mistake  ? 

A .    Yes,  sir. 


478  APPENDIX. 

Q.  That  mistake  having  been  discovered,  do  you  now  see  anything  in  the 
way  of  a  renewal  of  those  public  discussions,  and  a  return  to  all  the  moral 
influences  that  preceded  the  enactment  ? 

A.    None  at  all. 

Q.  Then  this  public  discussion  and  investigation  of  the  facts  may  continue 
as  well  under  the  law  as  without  it. 

A.  Yes,  sir.  There  is  now  much  said  about  the  adulteration  of  liquor, 
that  it  is  not  as  pure  as  formerly.  In  my  judgment,  that  is  all  nonsense. 
There  has  never  yet  been  a  day,  to  my  certain  knowledge,  when  liquors  were 
not  impure.  Perhaps  they  were  not  adulterated  as  much  formerly,  as  now. 
Then  we  used  to  sell  considerable  brandy.  Cognac  was  then  worth  from 
three  to  five  dollars  per  gallon.  We  also'  sold  a  great  deal  of  Spanish 
brandy, — that  had  more  fire  in  it  than  the  pure  Cognac,  and  many  of  our 
hard  drinkers  liked  it  better.  There  was  a  great  deal  of  adulteration  then. 
Liquor  was  reduced  below  its  "  bead,"  and  then  a  villainous  compound  put  in 
to  raise  the  "  bead."  This  was  forty  or  fifty  years  ago.  There  was  enough 
adulteration  then. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  FAY.)     Do  you  doubt  that  liquors  are  adulterated  now  ? 

A.    I  do  not,  but  I  know  that  they  were  also  adulterated  formerly. 

Q.     Do  you  know  about  the  former  adulterations  being  poisonous  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  about  that  personally.  I  know  that  we  used  to  purchase 
brandy  that  was  called  Spanish  brandy,  but  it  never  saw  Spain. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  know  whether  the  physicians  of  Fox- 
borough  were  educated  at  Harvard  College  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Derby  the  other  day,  in  which  he 
said  that  fifty  million  gallons  of  domestic  spirits  were  annually  used  in  the 
arts  in  this  country  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Did  not  the  use  of  moral  efforts  cease  pretty  generally  after  the 
Washingtonian  reform  in  1843,  '44  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  that  was  seven  or  eight  years  prior  to  the  enactment  of  the  pro- 
hibitory law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  NEHEMIAH  BOYNTON. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  are  a  member  of  the  Governor's  Council  ? 

A.  I  am  not  now.  I  had  the  honor  of  being  a  member  for  some  three 
years. 

Q.     Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 

A.     On  Commercial  Street,  Boston. 

Q.  What  views  have  you  formed  on  the  matters  here  in  discussion,  in  your 
experience  ? 

A.  I  can  simply  say  that  my  own  impression  and  conviction  is  very  strong 
against  a  license  law  ;  and  it  is  from  the  fact  that  I  believe  that  if  the  State 
should  grant  license  to  sell  spirituous  liquors,  the  tendency  would  be  to 


APPENDIX.  479 

increase  the  sale,  and  increase  drunkenness,  and  thereby  increase  crime. 
These  are  my  convictions. 

Q.     Have  you  given  the  subject  a  good  deal  of  thought  ? 

A.  I  have  been  interested  in  the  cause  of  temperance  some  thirty-two 
or  thirty-three  years,  and  have  always  acted  ,more  or  less, — that  is,  with 
greater  or  less  effort, — steadily  during  that  time  in  favor  of  temperance. 

Q.     What  do  you  mean  by  temperance  ? 

A.     I  mean  total  abstinence. 

Q.     From  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  medicine  or  as  beverages  ? 

A .     As  beverages. 

Q.  Do  you  make  any  distinction  between  prohibiting  the  use  as  a  medicine 
and  the  use  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.  You  have  been  a  total  abstainer  during  the  years  you  speak  of  having 
labored  to  promote  thf.  cause  of  temperance  ? 

A.    I  have,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  how  you  regard  the  struggle  now 
going  on  in  the  State  in  regard  to  the  sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  regard  the  efforts  that  are  now  being  made  to  secure  a 
license  law,  put  forth  by  individuals  who  arc  in  the  habit  of  selling  spirituous 
liquors,  and  who  desire  to  have  a  license  to  sell  it,  I  think  it  comes  from  that 
class  of  people.  I  have  no  doubt  of  it. 

Q.  You  have  not  seen  anything  in  the  attitude  of  the  liquor-dealers  to 
lead  you  to  believe  that  they  are  temperance  reformers  ? 

A.     I  have  not. 

Q.  Have  you  any  reason  to  believe  that  they  are  contributing  to  carry  OD 
this  movement  for  a  license  law  ? 

A.  My  opinions  are  that  they  are  contributing  very  strongly  to  bring 
about  a  change  in  the  law. 

Q.  Are  you  observing  any  change  in  the  condition  of  the  traffic  in  your 
neighborhood  of  the  city  ? 

A.  I  think  that  within  some  six  months,  or  perhaps  four  months,  there  has 
been  a  decided  change.  The  State  Constables  have  been  very  active.  They 
have  shut  up  quite  a  number  of  liquor-dealers,  and  some  of  them  have  been 
fined,  and  some  of  them  have  been  let  off  on  probation  ;  and  it  has  occasioned 
quite  an  excitement  among  that  class  of  people. 

Q.     Did  you  ever  know  such  a  consternation  among  liquor-dealers  before  ? 

A.     I  never  did,  so  far  as  my  observation  goes.    • 

Q.  Taking  it  as  a  fact  that  the  drinking  usages  of  the  community  are  more 
rife  at  present  than  formerly,  are  liquor-dealers  usually  in  consternation 
when  business  is  good  ? 

A.     That  is  not  usually  the  case  in  other  kinds  of  business. 

Q.  Do  you  see  any  indications  that  the  law  has  been  counteracted  by  the 
clandestine  sale  of  liquors  V 

A.  I  myself  do  not.  But  I  do  not  move  in  that  class  of  society  where  .1 
should  see  as  much  of  it  as  some  others  might  do. 

Q.     Do  you  see  evidences  of  intoxication  in  your  vicinity  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  I  do. 


480  APPENDIX. 

Q.     More  than  formerly  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is  much  the  same.  The  time  was,  some  twenty  years  ago, 
when  I  saw  much  more  of  it  than  I  do  now  ;  but  I  have  accounted  for  it, 
from  what  I  have  seen  since  the  war  closed.  I  have  accounted  for  it  by  the 
fact  that  the  war  had  a  tendency  to  increase  liquor-drinking  ;  and  the  people 
were  under  the  influence  of  it  to  a  greater  or  less  extent.  Still  I  have  not 
seen  so  many  cases,  and  people  have  spoken  of  it  to  me  and  remarked  the 
fact. 

Q.  You  do  not  suppose  that  the  suppression  of  the  traffic  has  been  carried 
to  such  an  extent  as  to  make  it  difficult  for  anybody  to  get  it  who  wanted  it  ? 

A.    I  do  not. 

Q.  Do  you  see  anything  in  the  execution  of  the  law  which  is  discouraging 
to  its  ultimate  success  ? 

A.    I  do  not.    I  believe  everything  is  encouraging. 

Q.     Do  you  believe  the  open  traffic  can  be  suppressed  ? 

A.     I  do. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  that  the  suppression  of  the  open  traffic  tends 
largely  to  discourage  the  use  of  liquors  ?  Do  you  believe  there  wiil  be  as 
much  liquor  drank,  when  the  open  traffic  is  suppressed,  in  a  clandestine 
manner  ? 

A.  I  do  not.  My  impression  is  that  it  is  getting  a  little  harder  to  get 
liquor  than  it  was  a  few  months  ago. 

Q.     You  remember  the  state  of  things  under  a  license  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  see  the  traffic  interfered  with  in  the  cities  as  much  under 
a  license  law  as  under  the  present  law  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  never  did. 

Q.  Can  you  see  anything  under  a  license  law  that  could  be  more  favorable 
to  the  suppression  of  the  traffic  than  any  other  law  ? 

A.  I  cannot.  It  seems  to  me  that  it  would  be  a  very  bad  step  for  the 
State  to  take. 

Q.    You  are  a  resident  of  Chelsea  ? 

A.    I  am. 

Q.    Will  you  state  the  views  of  the  people  of  that  city  in  this  regard  ? 

Q.     (By  Mr.  BOYNTON.)    In  what  respect  ? 

A.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  In  respect  to  the  execution  of  the  law  and  the 
general  state  of  temperance. 

A .  My  impression  is  that  a  large  majority  of  the  people  would  be  in  favor 
of  the  execution  of  the  present  law.  I  am  very  confident  that  the  city 
government  is  in  favor  of  the  present  system  of  legislation. 

Q.     Is  your  Mayor  a  prohibitory  law  man  ? 

A.    He  is. 

Q.     A  man  whose  views  are  known  on  the  subject  ? 

A .     I  supposed  they  were  well  known ;  I  have  known  them  well. 

Q.  Do  you  find  the  people  of  Chelsea  crying  out  in  view  of  the  probable 
suppression  of  the  traffic  ? 

A.    I  do  not. 


APPENDIX.  481 

Q.  You  have  observed  the  various  legislative  efforts  which  have  been 
made  bearing  upon  this  subject  for  the  last  fifteen  years  ?  Is  there  anything 
connected  with  these  facts,  with  what  has  been  done  by  the  Legislature,  and 
what  has  not  been  done,  taken  altogether,  which  is  discouraging  to  a  thorough 
and  practical  prohibition  ? 

A.  I  myself  see  nothing  discouraging.  I  think  it  only  wants  men  of 
determined  spirit  and  efficiency  to  put  the  law  through. 

Q.  Is  it  a  fair  case  when  a  city  government  like  that  of  the  city  of  Boston 
says  that  the  law  cannot  be  enforced,  when  they  themselves  have  not  tried  to 
enforce  it  ? 

A.     I  think  not. 

Q.     Has  the  law  imposed  specific  obligations  upon  municipal  authorities  ? 

A.     It  has. 

Q.     Have  they,  in  the  execution  of  the  law,  any  option  in  the  matter  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Are  they  bound  by  their  oaths  of  office  to  carry  out  the  law  ? 

A.     They  are,  sir. 

Q.  Suppose  a  license  scheme  were  enacted,  and  discretion  given  to  towns 
and  cities,  how  would  you  like  the  condition  of  Chelsea  in  this  respect,  if 
Boston  voted  for  a  license  system  ? 

A.     I  think  it  would  prove  injurious  to  the  city. 

Q.  Do  you  see  any  objection  to  placing  the  subject  of  criminal  legislation 
in  the  hands  of  the  different  municipalities,  politically  speaking  ? 

A.  That  is  a  matter  that  I  have  not  given  much  thought  to ;  but  it  would 
strike  me  rather  unfavorably. 

Q.  Which  do  you  think  would  give  the  best  prospect  of  wholesome  legisla- 
tion upon  criminals,  a  power  like  the  Legislature,  which  surveys  the  whole 
State,  or  a  local  power,  which  is  likely  to  be  varied  by  local  interests  ? 

A.     I  should  think  it  would  be  best  to  give  it  to  the  State,  by  all  means. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  is  the  duty  of  the  State,  to  execute  its  own  laws,  if 
the  various  municipalities  prove  unsuccessful  ? 

A.    I  think  it  is  the  duty  of  the  State  to  execute  its  laws. 

Q.    You  think  the  State  Constabulary  is  a  good  hit  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  CHARLES  CLEVELAND,  D.  D. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  We  would  like  to  have  you  give  your  views  upon 
the  subject  of  temperance  generally  ? 

A.  I  feel  myself  favored  in  being  here  and  giving  my  testimony  in  favor 
of  a  cause  that  I  have  loved  for  so  many  years.  My  work  for  thirty-three 
years  has  been  in  the  missionary  field.  For  thirty-three  years  I  have  been 
among  the  poor  of  this  city.  I  have  had  an  opportunity,  I  think,  to  discover 
between  the  chaff  and  the  wheat,  between  the  clean  and  the  unclean,  between 
those  who  are  temperate  and  those  who  are  intemperate.  I  have  seen  the 
wretchedness  of  the  latter  and  the  happiness  of  the  former.  The  old  system 
of  legislation,  the 'system  which  prevailed  for  many  years,  I  always  thought 
was  very  defective.  It  did  not  work  well.  It  did  not  work  at  all.  Grog- 
shops were  open  in  different  parts  of  the  city,  licensed  to  sell,  and  those  who 
61 


482  APPENDIX. 

were  fond  of  strong  drink  could  go  and  get  it.  Those  who  dealt  in  liquor 
were  never  very  particular  in  discriminating  between  those  who  would  use 
liquor  rationally  and  those  who  would  not.  It  used  to  be  very  common  to 
have  a  screen  in  the  shops,  and  that  screen,  I  concluded,  was  to  hide  that  of 
which  the  keeper  would  be  ashamed  to  have  seen  in  open  day.  I  once  took 
the  liberty  of  going  behind  one  of  those  screens,  and  there  I  saw  the  shelves 
filled  with  tankards  and  bottles  and  everything  of  the  kind  tending  to  lure 
those  who  were  fond  of  intoxicating  liquors.  It  came  to  pass  that  the  keeper 
of  that  saloon,  in  process  of  time,  became  an  overseer  of  the  poor.  Who 
chose  him  ?  The  rummies  chose  him.  But  he  has  gone  to  his  long  home  now, 
and  the  Lord  has  disposed  of  him  as  in  His  wisdom  and  goodness  He  saw  fit. 
I  went  to  one  of  the  shops  lately  where  the  rummies  used  to  throng  and 
where  lovers  of  intoxicating  liquor  resorted.  I  found  the  doors  shut  and  the 
windows  closed.  There  was  no  entrance.  I  said  to  a  man  standing  by, 
"  What  does  all  this  mean  ?  Why  is  this  shop  shut  ?  "  "  Why,"  said  he,  "  the 
State  Constables  did  it."  I  went  to  another  and  found  that  closed.  Said  I, 
"  What  does  all  this  mean  ?  "  "  The  State  Constables  have  been  here."  Ab, 
thought  I,  this  works  well.  Yes,  this  is  the  wheat,  the  other  was  the  chafi'. 
I  have  been  a  great  deal  among  the  poor.  I  have  distributed  groceries  and  a 
little  money,  and  I  have  had  an  opportunity  of  discovering  the  dispositions  of 
different  people  and  of  learning  whether  they  are  for  or  against  this  cause, 
this  blessed  cause,  this  cause  of  God.  If  people  now-a-days  would  only  do 
what  the  apostle  recommended  Timothy  I  would  have  no  fault  to  find. 
"  Take,"  said  he,  "  a  little  wine  for  thine  often  infirmities."  I  have  done  that 
myself,  but  I  seldom  take  it  now.  People  generally  do  more  than  that.  A 
man  wrote  to  me  from  New  York,  the  editor  of  the  "  Herald  of  Health." 
He  wanted  to  know  how  I  lived.  I  told  him  I  never  retired  to  bed  later  than 
eleven  o'clock.  I  think  that  these  rummies  and  those  who  sell  them  the  liquor 
have  no  particular  hour  for  retiring,  if  they  retire  at  all.  I  told  him,  too, 
that  I  rise,  the  ye  &  around,  before  the  sun,  and  always  have  done  so,  and  that 
I  took  no  spirituous  liquors,  and  that  I  hate  tobacco  because  it  is  the  harbinger 
of  strong  drink.  Whether  he  published  that  in  his  paper  or  not,  I  do  not 
know,  and  I  do  not  care. 

I  do  not  know  that  I  have  further  testimony  to  give  except  that  I  think 
that  the  license  system  is  a  rotten  system,  and  always  have.  Under  that 
system  every  shop  where  rum  was  sold  was  open  and  was  resorted  to  by 
multitudes.  The  different  streets  wherever  I  went  were  alive  with  the  shops. 
Now,  how  is  it.  Few,  comparatively.  My  rejoicing  is  that  the  old  system 
hath  now  no  place  in  the  thoughts  of  those  who  are  consistent  in  their  minds 
and  in  their  hearts.  I  see  many  women  there  in  the  galleries.  I  have  been 
among  multitudes  of  widows,  and  the  old  widows,  particularly,  I  like  to  help. 
I  have  a  great  partiality,  I  sympathize  with  them,  for  I  know  that  many  of 
them  were  made  widows  by  the  intemperance  of  their  husbands.  I  have  no 
doubt  about  it,  but  I  have  too  much  delicacy  to  ask  this  one  or  that  one 
whether  her  husband  was  a  temperate  man  or  not. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  worth  while  to  give  up  prohibition  because  the  law 
does  not  do  all  we  wish  ? 


APPENDIX.  483 

A.  My  dear  sir,  so  long  as  human  nature  is  as  it  is,  it  is  weak  and  liable 
to  mistakes.  I  would  keep  the  system  which  does  the  least  harm  and  the 
most  good,  and  that  is  the  prohibitory  system.  Stick  to  it.  I  believe  that 
you  will  find  those  who  were  partial  to  the  old  rotten  system  unanimously 
opposed  to  this  system.  There  would  not  be  a  single  dissenting  Vote, — no, 
not  one  ;  and  if  we  would  go  right,  we  must  go  against  the  rummies. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  of  giving  up  the  gospel  because  everybody  is  not 
converted  ? 

A.  Not  at  all,  sir,  not  at  all.  The  gospel  is  the  truth  and  preaches  "  peace 
on  earth,  good  will  toward  men."  Rum  destroys  peace  and  good  will  and 
makes  people  cross.  It  makes  men  get  up  cross  and  abuse  their  wives  and 
children.  Oh,  my  dear  friends,  the  gospel  of  peace  is  a  blessed  gospel  and  if 
we  would  but  have  the  spirit  of  the  Author  of  that  gospel  we  would  tread  in 
his  footsteps  and  would  seek  to  do  whatever  would  draw  us  nearer  unto  him. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  That  gospel  is  a  better  reforming  power  than  an 
Act  of  the  Legislature  ? 

A.    I  hope  so. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  think  it  would  be  worth  while  to  abolish 
the  Legislature  ? 

A.    I  would  sooner  be  abolished  myself  than  abolish  that. 

Mr.  SPOONER.    Perhaps  it  may  not  be  improper  to  state  that  our  reverend 

friend,  Dr.  Cleveland,  will  be  ninety-five  years  old  next  July. 

• 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  AMASA  WAXKER. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  understand  the  question  at  issue  here 
between  the  friends  of  a  license  law  and  the  friends  of  the  prohibitory  law. 
We  would  like  to  have  your  views  upon  the  subject. 

A.  I  think  I  ought  to  state,  in  the  commencement  of  what  I  have  to  say, 
that  I  was  not  in  favor  of  the  enactment  of  the  prohibitory  law ;  and  the  fact, 
I  suppose,  that  I  have  mentioned  that  circumstance  to  some  of  my  friends, 
without  any  hesitation  on  my  part,  gave  rise  to  the  supposition  that  I  was  in 
favor  of  its  repeal.  I  was  not  originally  in  favor  of  the  enactment  of  this 
law — that  is  to  say,  I  did  not  petition  for  it,  neither  did  I  oppose  it ;  but  when 
asked  by  a  great  advocate  of  temperance,  now  departed,  to  sign  a  petition  for 
the  law,  I  replied  that  I  had  rather  pursue  a  different  course.  I  thought  that 
we  were  gradually  making  it  impossible  that  liquor  should  be  sold  in  the  State. 
They  were  making  more  stringent  laws  every  year.  We  were  surrounding 
the  liquor-sellers  by  so  many  obstacles,  so  many  responsibilities  of  one  kind 
and  another,,  that  I  thought  that  eventually  we  should  extinguish  the  traffic. 
I  was  in  favor  of  carrying  the  citadel  of  intemperance  by  regular  approaches 
instead  of  by  assault.  The  friends  of  temperance  thought  best  to  go  on  and 
get  this  law  enacted.  It  was  passed  in  the  Legislature  by  a  large  majority. 
I  considered  that  it  was  a  good  law.  It  was  just  such  a  law  as  Massachusetts 
ought  to  have  and  ought  to  have  sustained,  because  all  true  men — that  is,  all 
true  friends  of  temperance  as  we  recognize  them — desired  the  utter  abolition 
of  the  traffic,  and  this  would  do  it  exactly ;  but,  as  I  anticipated,  in  my 
own  county  it  met  a  most  tremendous  opposition — an  opposition  like  that 
encountered  by  no  other  law  ever  enacted  in  this  Commonwealth.  That 


484  APPENDIX. 

law  has  continued  upon  the  statute  book  for  fifteen  years,  and  now,  to  my 
mind,  the  idea  of  engrafting  upon  it,  as  is  proposed,  a  license  law,  is 
simply  an  absurdity.  License  engrafted  upon  prohibition  !  The  two  things 
are  totally  antagonistic.  Abolish  your  prohibitory  law  if  you  adopt  a  license 
system,  most  assuredly.  I  cannot  conceive  how  any  one  can  consider  it  possi- 
ble to  engraft  a  license  law  upon  a  prohibitory  law  like  that  which  we  now 
have.  I  go  for  sustaining  the  law  as  it  is,  because,  in  the  first  place,  it  is  a 
good  law,  and  in  the  second  place  it  is  a  popular  law.  To  be  sure  that  I  was 
right  in  that  idea,  I  went  to  Webster's  dictionary,  and  I  found  the  definition 
of  the  word  "  popular"  to  be  "  that  which  is  pleasing  to  the  people  in  general." 
Taking  that  definition,  I  am  sure  that  this  is  a  popular  law  in  Massachusetts? 
I  am  entirely  sure  that  the  masses  of  the  people  are  strongly  in  favor  of  this 
law — of  the  people,  I  say.  It  is  popular  because  it  has  not  been  repealed ; 
and  when  I  say  "  people,"  I  include  mothers  as  well  as  brothers,  women  as 
well  as  men.  I  have  never  advocated  female  suffrage,  nor  have  I  ever  opposed 
it ;  but  I  am  quite  certain  if  the  women,  could  vote  upon  this  question,  they 
would  not  vote  for  the  repeal  of  the  prohibitory  law.  You  would  not  get  one 
vote  in  a  hundred  for  such  repeal,  perhaps  not  one  in  a  thousand.  The  women 
are  the  special  sufferers  by  the  liquor  traffic.  Another  reason  why  I  am 
opposed  to  this  change  is  that  all  the  liquor-dealers,  and  the  moderate  as  well 
as  immoderate  drinkers,  desire  to  have  the  sale  of  liquor  licensed,  at  least  that 
is  my  opinion  from  what  observation  I  have  made  ;  they  all  desire  it.  That, 
to  my  mind,  is  conclusive  evidence  that  we  ought  not  to  license.  If  I  knew 
of  no  other  fact,  that  one  fact  would  settle  the  matter  in  my  own  mind.  We 
have  learned  a  great  many  lessons  out  of  the  great  conflict  of  the  rebellion. 
We  learned  that  just  what  the  rebels  wanted  was  just  what  we  ought  not  to 
let  them  have ;  so  now  when  we  are  trying  to  restrict,  precisely  what  they 
want  is  precisely  what  it  will  not  do  for  them  to  have,  if  we  mean  to  have 
a  united,  prosperous  and  happy  people.  We  must  organize  loyalty  and 
not  disloyalty — loyalty  to  the  North  and  not  disloyalty.  These  reasons 
are  conclusive  to  my  mind.  I  will  notice  some  of  the  fallacies  that  are 
scattered  abroad  by  those  who  are  interested  in  this  matter,  and  which 
have  a  great  influence  upon  the  popular  mind,  and  especially  upon  the 
minds  of  those  who  believe  the  fallacies.  The  first  is  that  intemperance  has 
increased  under  this  law.  Now,  sir,  I  maintain  that  there  is  no  proof  of  this ; 
but  if  it  is  true,  has  not  incendiarism  increased  also  within  the  last  fifteen 
years  ?  I  suppose  it  has  increased  one  hundred  per  cent.  Your  insurance 
officers  will  tell  you  that  it  has  increased  one  hundred,  and  probably  three  hun- 
dred per  cent.  We  know  the  fact  that  it  has  enormously  increased,  so  that 
our  fire  insurance  companies  are  increasing  in  number  and  gaining  in  business 
in  consequence  of  incendiarism.  There  is  also  another  fact,  that  the  popu- 
lation has  increased.  Since  this  law  was  enacted  it  must  have  increased 
about  forty  per  cent.  From  1850  to  1860  it  increased  thirty-three  per  cent., 
and  the  increase  up  to  1865  must  have  been  as  great  as  forty  per  cent.  Now, 
unless  there  is  forty  per  cent,  more  intoxication  at  the  present  day  than  there 
was  when  this  law  was  enacted,  there  is  no  increase  at  all.  Now,  if  you 
add  forty  per  cent,  to  what  existed  at  the  time  of  the  enactment  of  this  law, 
you  will  cover  all  the  increase  of  intemperance.  I  know  that  there  is  a  great 


APPENDIX.  485 

change.  I  know  that  several  unfortunate  things  have  occurred.  One  is,  that 
we  have  imported  European  vices, — degrading  European  vices.  One  of  those 
vices  is  the  drinking  of  lager  beer.  It  came  with  our  German  population, — 
a  fine  population,  but  they  bring  over  that  miserable  vice.  They  have  intro- 
duced the  use  of  the  worst  liquor  ever  drank  by  human  lips — lager  beer.  It 
is  so  fascinating, — it  does  not  intoxicate.  I  have  heard  the  point  gravely 
argued  in  a  court  in  Massachusetts,  that  lager  beer  did  not  intoxicate, — as  if 
people  would  drink  it  if  it  did  not  intoxicate.  That  insiduous  article  has 
done  more  than  anything  else  to  demoralize  the  public,  so  far  as  the  drinking 
of  intoxicating  liquors  is  concerned.  Then  we  have  had  more  or  less  demor- 
alization because  of  the  war,  as  I  have  just  said,  although  I  think  that  there 
has  been  less  demoralization  than  we  had  reason  to  fear.  Still  there  has  been 
a  great  deal.  All  history  shows  the  demoralizing  tendency  of  wars.  Then, 
again,  we  have  had  the  demoralization  resulting  from  a  very  inflated  currency. 
Some  may  smile  at  that  remark,  but  it  is  true  that  a  false  standard  of  value 
demoralizes  public  sentiment.  It  creates  reckless  extravagence, — reckless 
expenditure  everywhere.  It  destroys  the  moral  sentiment  of  the  people  ; 
nothing,  perhaps,  destroys  it  so  much.  It  was  the  opinion  of  Richard  Cobden, 
and  he  expressed  it  to  me  in  1823,  that  the  demoralization  of  our  currency  in 
this  country,  was  greater  than  the  demoralization  of  slavery.  We  have  that 
demoralization  now  in  its  worst  form.  We  have  a  currency  demoralized  by 
fifty  per  cent.,  which  has  not  been  without  its  influence  in  producing  the 
present  state  of  affairs.  Another  fallacy  is  this :  that  licensing  will  stop 
illicit  selling.  I  believe  it  is  laid  down  as  a  settled  fact  by  the  friends  of 
the  license  system,  that  if  we  grant  licenses  it  will  stop  all  this  illicit  selling. 
But  it  has  been  shown  that  when  you  did  license  it  did  not  stop  illicit  selling. 
How  then  will  it  stop  it  now  when  we  have  so  great  an  illicit  sale  ?  Suppose, 
for  example,  you  go  into  a  country  town.  Take  my  own  town, — you  may  as 
well  take  that  as  any, — a  small  country  town  of  three  thousand  inhabitants. 
Suppose  one  man  is  licensed  there  to  sell  liquor.  He  will  be  willing  to  pay  a 
large  sum  for  a  license.  Will  there  not,  after  granting  this  license  to  him,  be 
the  same  inducement  for  all  these  little  shanties  around  the  outskirts  of  the 
village  to  sell,  that  there  it  now  ?  Precisely  ;  and  they  will  do  it.  But  it  is 
said  that  those  who  are  licensed  will  be  interested  to  stop  such  sale.  There 
are  a  great  many  interested  to  stop  it  now.  They  do  not  succeed,  but  they 
expect  to  finally.  But  their  success  will  not  be  in  consequence  of  any  license 
law ;  it  will  be  in  consequence  of  something  else,  that  we  hope  to  notice 
directly.  Again,  it  is  said  that  stopping  the  sale  will  only  increase  it, — that 
those  who  could  not  get  it  in  respectable  places,  would  seek  it  in  the  low, 
cheap  groggeries.  I  regard  that  position  as  entirely  false.  Undoubtedly  it  is 
false,  because  we  perceive  that  the  liquor-dealers  are  so  anxious  that  we 
should  license  the  sale.  Would  they  want  a  license  law  that  was  going  to  stop 
the  traffic  in  liquors  V  Would  they  be  in  favor  of  a  license  system  that  would 
restrict  the  use  of  intoxicating  drinks  ?  Most  certainly  not.  No  one  believes 
that  for  a  moment ;  yet  that  fallacy  is  often  presented  to  the  public  mind, — 
that  licensing  will  stop  the  sale :  but  those  who  are  selling  know  that  it  will 
not  stop  the  sale  at  all. 


486  APPENDIX. 

Another  argument  made  is  that  the  present  law  is  arbitrary.  I  suppose 
that  all  laws  are  arbitrary ;  they  compel  obedience  to  certain  conditions.  If 
Massachusetts  has  enacted  a  law,  and  kept  that  law  upon  the  statute  book  for 
fifteen  years,  notwithstanding  the  most  powerful  combinations  that  were  ever 
made  to  overthrow  the  law,  can  such  a  law  be  said  to  be  an  arbitrary  one  ? 
Can  a  law  that  the  people  choose  to  keep,  and  intend  to  have,  be  called  arbi- 
trary ?  Certainly  not ;  and  the  great  question  comes  up  whether  Massachu- 
setts is  going  to  adopt  a  principle  that  if  a  law  is  not  obeyed,  the  Legislature 
should  repeal  it.  We  are  coining  to  that  point.  The  opponents  of  prohibi- 
tion are  seeking  to  repeal  a  law  because  it  is  not  executed.  That  is  another 
point  that  I  would  make.  It  is  a  popular  fallacy  that  the  law  cannot  be 
enforced.  I  believe  that  the  reverse  of  that  is,  in  fact,  the  cause  of  this  move- 
ment. They  know  that  it  is  going  to  be  enforced  ;  they  know  that  the  State 
Constabulary  is  going  to  enforce  it,  and  that  is  the  reason  of  this  tremendous 
effort  to  have  it  repealed.  We  have  brought  the  thing  to  a  crisis  now.  You 
remember  that  in  the  earlier  part  of  the  war  that  we  were  very  afraid  of  hurting 
the  rebels.  We  had  military  commanders  who  did  not  want  to  do  them  much 
harm.  At  last  we  had  some  commanders  who  intended  to  make  serious  busi- 
ness and  whip  the  rebels  out,  and  it  was  accomplished.  We  have  just  now 
come  to  the  point  where  we  are  going  to  enforce  this  law,  or  else  no  Massa- 
chusetts law  can  be  enforced,  if  there  is  opposition  to  it.  We  have  a  State 
Constabulary.  The  truth  is,  that  the  population  of  this  State  has  not  only 
increased  forty  per  cent.,  but  that  forty  per  cent,  has  been  a  foreign  element, 
to  a  great  extent.  We  have  a  large  imported  foreign  element  in  our  popula- 
tion ;  a  population  raised  in  another  country,  with  other  ideas,  with  other 
habits,  and  all  that  population  has  taken  sides  with  the  liquor  interest.  Of 
course  there  are  exceptions,  but  we  know  that  the  mass  of  them,  owing  to 
their  previous  habits,  throw  their  whole  influence,  their  whole  power  at  the 
ballot-box,  on  the  side  of  the  liquor  interest.  This  is  strikingly  so  in  the  city 
of  New  York.  We  know  how  it  is  New  York  City  cannot  govern  itself. 
They  are  satisfied  of  that ;  they  are  satisfied  that  they  cannot  maintain  self- 
government,  and  consequently  they  called  upon  the  Legislature  of  the  State 
for  a  metropolitan  police  force,  and  they  got  a  metropolitan  police  force,  and 
everybody  is  thankful  for  it.  It  was  an  absolute  necessity.  The  people  of 
the  city  saw  that  they  could  not  have  protection  for  person  and  property 
unless  tbtt  State  stepped  in  and  governed  them.  That  same  principle  is  going 
to  run  rigjt  through  the  United  States  of  America.  I  have  no  doubt  of  it. 
Wo  have  got  to  have  our  State  Constabulary.  Why  ?  Because  we  need  a 
constabulary  force  that  is  independent  of  local  things.  Our  town  officers 
have  become  notoriously  inefficient  in  everything  relating  to  police  matters. 
They  have  become  almost  a  nullity.  They  will  do  anything  popular,  but  the 
moment  there  is  anything  to  face, — whenever  there  is  anything  that  will  endan- 
ger "  my  election,"  an  officer  will  not  hazard  a  single  vote  by  arresting  a  fellow 
that  he  knows  ought  to  be  arrested.  Is  there  not  a  great  deal  of  that  feeling 
in  this  country,  and  is  it  not  growing  worse  and  worse  every  year  ?  It  cer- 
tainly is,  or  I  am  very  much  mistaken.  Now  we  have  a  police,  such  as  I  hope 
will  be  sustained  and  made  still  more  efficient,  and  men  appointed  on  the 
force,  not  because  they  want  places,  but  because  the  State  wants  them  to 


APPENDIX.  487 

serve — energetic,  faithful  men — energetic,  vigilant  men.  I  hope  they  will 
appoint  loyal  men ;  men  loyal  to  the  law,  men  who  want  the  law  enforced. 
Then  there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  the  result  of  this  movement.  I  have  no 
doubt  at  all  of  the  result.  The  law  can  be  enforced,  and  that  is  what  those 
who  are  opposed  to  it  fear.  I  trust  it  will  be  enforced.  Massachusetts  has 
led  in  almost  all  great  reforms,  and  now  do  we  want  to  back  out  of  this,  after 
we  have  passed  a  good  law,  and  kept  it  on  the  statute-book  for  fifteen  years, 
and  it  has  produced  such  good  results  as  I  maintain  it  has — shall  we,  after  all, 
go  ^ack  to  the  license  system  again  ?  Must  I  have  the  mortification,  in  our 
little  town,  of  seeing  a  load  of  liquor  brought  right  up  in  front  of  the  town 
hall  and  sold  for  the  public  good  ?  I  beg  to  be  saved  from  that  distressing 
sight.  It  would  be  terribly  distressing — it  would  be  one  of  the  most  mortiy- 
ing  things  in  my  life.  I  can  recollect  what  has  been  done  by  the  friends  of 
temperance.  I  can  recollect  the  condition  of  things  fifty  years  ago.  I  was 
then  an  apprentice  in  a  country  grocery  store,  and  we  sold  a  great  deal  of 
rum.  I  have,  in  four  days,  drained  a  hogshead  of  new  rum, — by  the  gallon, 
quart,  pint  and  gill.  In  the  summer  season,  we  used  to  sell  in  that  small 
store  that  I  was  in,  a  hogshead  in  two  weeks,  and  there  was  another  store  in 
town  that  sold  more  than  that.  The  population  of  the  town  at  that  time  was 
about  one  thousand,  and  in  that  town  at  that  time,  taking  the  ysar  through, 
there  were  sold  in  both  stores  about  forty  hogsheads  of  twenty  gallons  each. 
This  was  in  North  Brookfield,  during  the  years  from  1812  to  1818,  with  a  pop- 
ulation of  but  ten  or  twelve  hundred.  I  was  a  young  lad  then,  but  still  I  had 
some  thoughts  about  me,  and  I  considered  the  trouble  that  resulted  from  the 
sale.  I  took  one  of  the  streets  that  ran  through  the  centre  of  the  town,  and 
traced  it  to  the  centre  of  the  neighboring  town,  three  miles  distant.  There  were 
houses  on  both  sides  of  the  way  to  the  next  town,  and  from  the  centre  of  our 
town  to  the  centre  of  the  next  town  there  was  a  drunkard  in  every  house. 
Sometimes  it  was  the  father,  sometimes  a  son,  and  sometimes  it  was  the 
mother.  That  was  the  condition  of  things,  as  I  knew  very  well,  for  I  was 
right  there  in  the  midst  of  the  sale.  It  is  quite  useless  for  any  one  to  tell  me 
that  there  is  now  as  much  intemperance  in  our  town  as  there  was  fifty  years 
ago.  I  hear  it  said  by  young  men,  who  never  saw  the  first  temple,  that  at  the 
present  time  there  is  more  intemperance  than  ever  before.  That  is  an  entire 
mistake.  The  temperance  reform  has  been  a  grand  success ;  not  quite  so  suc- 
cessful, to  be  sure,  as  the  anti-slavery  reform,  but  it  stands  next  to  it,  and  will 
be  equally  successful,  I  trust,  in  the  end.  This  amount  of  rum,  that  was  sold 
as  I  have  said,  was  in  addition  to  all  the  brandy  and  gin  and  whiskey  and 
cherry  rum.  I  used  to  see  a  great  deal  of  drunkenness  in  those  days.  I  do  not 
believe,  on  the  average,  I  could  say  that  I  now  see  a  man  intoxicated  so  much 
as  to  reel,  oftener  than  once  in  a  month.  Occasionally,  I  see  some  poor  man, 
(by  that  I  mean  unfortunate),  some  unfortunate  man  the  worse  for  liquor,  but 
it  is  a  rare  sight.  When  I  was  a  young  man,  it  was  not  an  uncommon  sight 
to  see  our  respectable  citizens,  as  we  called  them,  drunk,  or,  at  least,  under 
the  influence  of  liquor.  To  say  that  the  amount  of  intemperance  is  greater 
now  than  it  was  at  that  time,  is  an  absurdity.  Although  the  issue  is  not  made 
here,  still  the  fallacy  is  frequently  stated  in  the  community,  especially  by 
those  who  are  young. 


488  APPENDIX. 

Q.     This  was  under  a  license  law  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  People  were  licensed  in  those  days  to  sell  rum  for  the  public 
good.  Another  fallacy  which  I  see  dwelt  upon  a  great  deal  is  in  regard  to 
wine  drinking  being  so  very  innocent,  and  not  leading  to  intemperance.  I 
think  that  is  as  great  a  fallacy  as  any  that  I  have  mentioned.  It  inevitably 
leads  to  the  worst  kind  of  intemperance.  That  the  population  of  the  wine- 
drinking  parts  of  Europe  is  so  temperate  as  represented  I  do  not  believe.  I 
have  visited  Paris,  and  if  I  were  asked,  "  Did  you  see  anybody  drunk  in  the 
streets  ?  "  I  should  say,  No,  and  for  the  very  best  reason  indeed.  You  know 
they  have  a  police  there  that  is  legion,  that  is  everywhere,  at  every  corner, 
that  is  ever-vigilant,  and  the  moment  a  man  is  discovered  the  worse  for  liquor 
he  is  put  out  of  sight.  You  cannot  see  a  man  drunk  in  the  streets.  It  is 
against  the  law,  against  the  police  regulations  for  a  man  in  any  degree  intox- 
icated to  remain  in  the  streets  or  in  the  public  gardens.  When  a  man  wants 
to  get  drunk  he  is  careful  to  get  out  of  sight,  and  if  his  friends  discover  that 
he  is  becoming  intoxicated  they  put  him  out  of  the  sight  of  the  police;  so  that 
if  there  were  ten  times  as  many  drunkards  in  Paris  as  there  are,  you  would 
not  see  any  of  them  in  the  streets.  That  is  the  explanation  of  that  fallacy. 
I  have  known  from  authority  that  I  think  to  be  good,  that  there  is  a  vast 
amount  of  intemperance  through  France,  that  the  population  is  absolutely 
being  destroyed,  that  the  natural  increase  is  being  reduced  by  the  use  of  wine. 
I  have  no  doubt  of  it.  The  wealth  of  France  has  always  been  kept  down  by 
the  use  of  wine,  because  so  many  millions  of  people  in  France  were  employed 
in  raising  grapes  for  the  wines  that  the  people  drink.  The  culture  of  the  vine 
is  one  great  part  of  the  industry  of  the  nation.  France  as  compared  with 
some  other  countries  has  a  great  population  of  poor  people,  the  masses  are 
poor  and  always  must  be  poor  while  they  spend  so  large  a  part  of  all  they 
have  in  wine,  in  that  which  contributes  nothing  to  their  happiness  or  welfare. 
That  the  population  of  France  is  decreasing  is  known  very  well ;  the  census 
shows  it,  and  the  French  people  are  alarmed  because  of  it.  There  is  not  an 
actual  decrease,  but  the  increase  is  diminishing,  and  if  that  continues,  the 
time  will  soon  come  when  there  will  be  an  absolute  loss,  and  finally  absolute 
extermination.  The  thought  frightens  them.  There  are  one  or  two  reasons 
for  that  decrease.  One  is  the  existence  of  the  strict  military  regulations 
which  every  year  puts  into  the  military  service  170,000  young  men  between 
the  ages  of  eighteen  and  twenty-five,  who  are  kept  in  that  service  for  seven 
years.  What  a  horrible  system  that  must  be,  and  yet  it  is  carried  out  in 
France  and  contributes  very  much  to  the  result  I  have  mentioned.  I  will  say 
in  conclusion  that  I  am  earnestly  in  hope  (I  say  hope,  that  implies  expecta- 
tion,) that  this  law  will  be  fully  sustained.  I  cannot  doubt  it,  because,  so  far 
as  my  knowledge  extends,  the  people  believe  that  they  need  this  law,  and  all 
this  mighty  opposition  is  simply  the  result  of  interest,  an  endeavor  to  throw 
off  the  stigma  of  the  crime  of  selling  liquor.  A  man  that  can  ride  in  his 
carriage  and  live  in  his  palace  does  not  like  the  idea  of  ever  having  to  look 
through  the  grates.  It  is  not  respectable  to  look  through  grates.  There's 
where  the  shoe  pinches.  That  is  one  reason  of  opposition  to  this  law  and  one 
of  the  strongest  reasons  why  they  seek  the  repeal  of  this  law,  because  it  makes 
the  selling  of  liquor  a  crime  and  attaches  odium  to  the  seller.  I  think  if 


APPENDIX.  489 

anything  is  felonious,  it  is  an  attempt  to  poison  people  or  to  give  them 
facilities  for  killing  themselves  and  destroying  their  children  and  property. 
If  I  were  a  political  economist,  I  think  I  could  make  a  great  argument  upon 
the  economy  of  this,  showing  the  wealth  that  it  destroys.  I  do  not  intend  to 
go  into  that  argument,  it  not  being  in  my  line,  but  any  one  can  see  what  a 
terrible  destruction  intemperance  must  be  to  wealth.  When  I  was  a  young 
man,  the  farmers  were  poor.  They  had  to  have  new  rum  the  first  thing,  and 
then  whatever  else  they  could  get  they  would  have,  but  it  was  very  little  else 
that  they  could  get  after  supplying  themselves  with  new  rum.  It  is  surprising 
to  see  how  poor  they  lived,  but  ruin  they  must  and  did  have,  and  if  in  such  a 
town  as  that,  if  they  bought  so  many  hogsheads  of  rum  they  could  not  help  being 
poor.  As  soon  as  we  got  rid  of  the  sale  of  rum,  as  soon  as  we  got  this  temper- 
ance movement  in  operation,  just  so  soon  the  prosperity  of  the  town  began  to 
increase.  Mr.  Abbott  Lawrence  was  a  very  sensible  man,  a  good  man. 
When  he  was  asked  in  England  on  one  occasion  the  cause  of  the  prosperity 
of  the  American  people,  he  said  that  it  was  temperance.  At  least  I  have  so 
read,  and  such  a  remark  sounds  just  like  him.  Therefore,  by  every  moral  and 
economical  consideration,  I  go  in  favor  of  the  present  law. 

Q.     Did  you  observe  the  effect  of  beer-drinking  upon  the  English  laboring 
classes  ? 

A.  I  associated  with  the  temperance  men  in  England  as  long  ago  as  the 
year  1843.  I  went  there  first  when  the.  temperance  people  were  despised 
beyond  all  measure.  I  went  there  in  1843  when  it  was  not  at  all  respectable 
to  be  a  teetotaller,  as  they  called  it.  The  reform  started  right  there  in  the 
first  place.  It  started  on  teetotallism.  I  went  again  in  1846,  and  found 
myself  in  a  more  respectable  company  than  in  1843.  I  began  to  find  a  great 
many  clergymen,  and  many  respectable  people  who  were  teetotallers.  We 
had  a  pretty  respectable  celebration  of  temperance  people  under  the  presi- 
dency of  Dr.  Johnson.  When  I  went  there  again  in  1859,  I  found  still 
greater  change.  There  they  had  a  great  organization — the  United  Kingdom 
Alliance.  They  had  hundreds  and  thousands  of  societies,  and  raised  a  vast 
amount  of  money,  and  were  carrying  on  a  glorious  movement.  In  regard  to  the 
condition  of  the  laboring  people,  the  temperance  societies  made  it  their  special 
effort  to  stop  beer-drinking  among  that  class.  They  saw  the  terrible  effects 
of  beer-drinking  upon  the  working  classes.  Fifty  million  bushels  of  grain 
was  every  year  converted  into  beer  and  then  retailed  out  to  these  poor 
fellows  who,  after  they  have  done  a  hard  day's  work,  go  into  the  beer-shops 
and  spend  their  hard  earnings  for  liquor,  while  their  families  are  starving. 
Mr.  Bright  is  making  a  great  movement  there  to  enfranchise  the  masses.  The 
great  obstacle  to  such  a  movement  is  that  the  masses  are  so  sunken,  so 
demoralized  by  beer.  If  it  were  not  for  that,  there  would  be  far  greater  hope 
for  success.  They  are  guzzling  beer  all  the  time.  It  is  one  continued 
stream  of  beer,  beer,  beer.  I  detest  beer  more  than  I  do  brandy  or  rum. 
Anything  else  but  beer;  I  think  beer-drinking  such  a  brutal,  low,  barbarous 
practice.  It  keeps  all  those  who  indulge  in  it,  in  a  low  and  degraded  condition. 
The  English  people  complain  of  their  condition  and  say  that  they  are  very 
poor.  They  undoubtedly  are  poor  ;  but  if  they  would  become  teetotallers, 
they  would  become  as  comfortable,  almost,  as  the  people  of  this  country. 
62 


490  APPENDIX. 

Q'  Did  you  discover  that  beer-drinking  bloated  them  up  or  that  they  bore 
the  appearance  of  a  diseased  system  ? 

A.     There  is  no  doubt  about  that. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  heard  it  said  that  if  one  of  them  was  wounded  it  was 
almost  impossible  to  heal  the  wound  because  the  system  was  so  corrupted  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  it  is  a  sad  fact.  Drink  injures  the  human  system,  deteriorates 
the  vital  powers.  In  the  second  annual  report  of  the  Board  of  State 
Charities,  that  subject  is  discussed,  and  the  effect  of  liquor  in  deteriorating 
the  human  system  is  shown.  It  is  a  report  well  worth  the  attention  of  every 
one,  and  it  ought  to  be  published  as  a  tract. 

Q.     Did  you  ever  visit  the  breweries  ? 

A.  1  never  did;  and  I  do  not  know  as  it  would  be  a  very  agreeable  sight. 
I  was  once  invited,  while  attending  a  public  convention,  to  do  so, — the  officers 
of  the  convention  were  invited  to  visit  a  great  brewery,  belonging  to  one 
of  the  members,  but  I  had  no  desire  to  see  the  way  in  which  the  beer  was 
made.  I  have  heard  it  described. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  of  the  effects  of  beer-drinking  and  beer-making  upon 
the  employees  themselves  ? 

A.  I  think  there  can  be  no  doubt  about  the  fact  that  it  injures  them.  I 
am  satisfied  from  my  own  observation  that  is  not  safe  to  have  anything  to  do 
with  liquor. 

Q.  In  reference  to  that  class  of  people,  have  you  ever  heard  it  remarked 
that  if  one  of  them  got  wounded,  it  was  almost  certain  death  ? 

A.  I  have  understood  that  such  was  the  fact.  It  deteriorates  the  system, 
and  the  person  injured  stands  a  much  poorer  chance  of  being  cured.  I  have 
heard  it  remarked  that  nothing  saved  Charles  Sumner  when  his  brains  were 
beaten  out  by  Brooks,  but  the  fact  that  he  was  correct  in  his  habits,  and  that 
he  could  not  have  lived  if  he  had  not  been  a  temperate  man. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Do  you  know  which  has  always  been  the  most 
temperate  nation  in  Europe  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  as  I  could  state. 

Q.  Do  you  know  which  has  always  been  the  most  drunken  nation  in 
Europe  ? 

A.     I  should  not  wonder  if  the  English  had. 

Q.  But  you  do  not  know  which  has  always  been  the  most  temperate  nation 
in  Europe  V 

A .    I  have  not  gone  into  those  statistics. 

Q.  Do  you  know  which  is  the  poorest  nation  in  Europe,  and  always  has 
been  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    You  are  not  testifying,  then,  upon  generalizations  of  facts  ? 

A.    I  answer  all  questions. 

Q.  You  made  a  speech — a  very  able  one — but  I  am  endeavoring  to  see 
what  is  your  base  of  facts.  What  should  you  say  about  Spain  ? 

A .     I  should  say  that  it  was  a  very  unfortunate  country. 

Q.     Do  you  consider  Spain  the  poorest  nation  in  Europe  ? 

A.     They  are  terribly  cursed  with  poverty. 


APPENDIX.  491 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  at  the  beginning  of  this  century  they  did  not  raise 
wheat  enough  for  their  own  consumption  ? 

A.     Very  likely. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  the  people  were  so  miserably  poor  that  it  was 
considered  no  disgrace  even  for  the  students  in  the  colleges  to  beg  ? 

A.     I  have  no  doubt  of  it. 

Q.  Are  you  not  also  aware  that  it  is  the  most  temperate  nation  in  the 
world  in  respect  to  the  drinking  of  wines  and  liquors  ? 

A.     They  may  be  the  most  priest-ridden. 

Q.     Are  you  not  aware  that  such  is  the  fact  ? 

A .  I  do  not  dispute  it  at  all !  My  argument  is  founded  upon  American 
statistics  and  American  facts. 

Q.  We  will  take  the  Old  World  for  illustration.  Are  you  not  aware  that 
the  most  drunken  country  that  the  world  has  ever  known  is  Scotland  ? 

A.    I  am  sorry  to  say  that  the  Scots  drink  whiskey  excessively. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  the  Sheriff  of  a  county  in  Scotland  testified 
before  a  Committee  of  the  British  Parliament,  that  every  tenth  house  in  that 
county  was  a  place  where  liquor  was  sold,  and  that  the  people  drank  twice 
as  much  whiskey  as  any  equal  population  upon  the  globe  ? 

A.     I  do  not  doubt  it. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  that  is  the  country  where  prohibition  by  law 
first  began,  continued  the  longest,  and  struggled  the  hardest  ? 

A.     I  was  not  aware  of  that  fact. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  Sweden  at  one  time  had  a  larw  which  was 
practically  prohibitory  ? 

A.     No,  sir ;  I  am  not  aware  of  it. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  that  under  the  influence  of  that  law  the  private  dis- 
tillation in  people's  houses,  carried  up  the  manufacture  of  liquor  to  the 
annual  average  of  ten  gallons  to  every  man  woman  and  child  in  Sweden  ? 

A.     It  is  very  likely. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  proportion  of  the  whole  population  of  France  are 
able  to  procure  even  their  cheap  wines  for  drink  ? 

A.     France  is  a  large  nation  of  very  poor  people. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  three-fourths  of  the  whole  population  of  France, 
notwithstanding  wine  is  their  great  staple,  are  unable  to  procure  it  for  their 
own  consumption  ? 

A.  If  the  other  quarter  drink  all  the  wine  that  is  made  in  France,  they 
must  be  very  great  drunkards. 

Q.  You  undertake  to  testify  as  to  the  wine-drinking  habits  of  the  French 
people,  and  then  by  drawing  certain  deductions  would  have  us  infer  that  cer- 
tain facts  existing  or  supposed  to  exist,  were  due  to  the  fact  that  the  French 
were  a  wine-drinking  people  ;  would  you  be  surprised  if  you  were  to  learn 
that  not  more  than  one-fourth  of  the  people  of  France  were  able  to  get  wine 
at  all  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  that. 

Q.  If  it  be  true,  then  the  poverty  of  the  people  cannot  be  owing  to  their 
intemperance  ? 


492  APPENDIX. 

A.  If  wine  is  used,  all  those  effects  must  come.  The  people  are  taxed  to 
death,  as  they  have  always  been,  to  support  their  vast  army. 

Q.     Then  their  poverty  is  not  owing  to  their  drinking,  but  to  other  causes  ? 

A.     It  is  owing  to  a  variety  of  causes. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  the  land  of  France  is  taxed  to  pay  the  interest 
upon  debts  that  have  come  down  from  ancient  times,  so  that  not  more  than 
twenty-four  per  cent,  of  the  annual  yield  of  the  soil  goes  towards  the  support 
of  those  who  cultivate  the  soil  ?  * 

Q.  (By  Mr.  WALKER.)  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  debts  have  come 
from  a  period  anterior  to  the  rebellion  ? 

A.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     Debts  that  have  been  gradually  accumulating. 

A.  (By  Mr.  WALKER.)  I  am  aware  that  a  most  frightful  taxation  is  laid 
upon  the  land,  and  one  of  the  most  intelligent  men  that  I  met  in  France,  told 
me  that  the  next  revolution  would  be  founded  upon  that  fact. 

"Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  at  a  very  recent  period,  the  interest  upon  the  debt, 
mortgaged  upon  the  lands  of  France,  was  greater  than  the  interest  upon  the 
national  debt  of  Great  Britain  ? 

A.     I  should  doubt  that. 

Q.     I  have  seen  it  so  stated  on  good  authority. 

A.     I  think  that  it  is  a  mistake. 

Q.     That  was  an  estimate  made  something  less  than  twenty  years  ago. 

A.     There  is  a  terrible  taxation  upon  the  land;  there  is  no  doubt  of  that. 

Q.  Then  one  great  cause  of  the  poverty  of  the  people,  is  their  heavy 
taxation  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Does  that  taxation  not  create  so  great  a  poverty  among  the  people  of 
France,  that  they  are  not  able  to  consume  their  own  wines  ? 

A.  Undoubtedly;  that,  in  addition  to  their  intemperate  habits,  makes 
them  very  poor  people. 

Q.     The  ox  that  treads  out  the  corn,  is  himself  muzzled  ? 

A.     It  is  done  to  a  painful  extent. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  the  habits  of  the  people  are  improving  in 
respect  to  temperance ;  that  the  cause  is  gaining  ground  in  what  used  to  be 
the  most  drunken  countries  of  the  world, — in  Scotland  and  Sweden,  for 
instance  ? 

A.     That  is  because  humanity  is  advancing  everywhere. 

Q.     Humanity  is  on  the  march  ? 

A.    I  think  so. 

Q.  And  this  advance  strikes  out  from  the  centre,  and  here  and  there 
appears  upon  the  circumference  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  that  which  the  law  could  not  do  either  in  Sweden  or  in  Norway, 
has  been  done,  and  is  being  done,  without  the  law.  Is  it  not  so  ? 

A.     They  are  struggling  to  get  the  law. 

Q,     But  it  has  been  done  thus  far  without  the  law  ? 

A.  They  tried  perhaps  prematurely  to  get  the  law.  They  are  trying 
to  get  it  now. 


APPENDIX.  493 

Q.  In  your  earlier  years,  say  fifty  years  ago,  you  saw  New  England  society 
in  what  might  be  called  the  "  Slough  of  Despond,"  in  respect  to  intemperance  ? 

A.    I  have  described  it  as  it  was  then. 

Q.    It  was  in  a  very  discouraging  condition  throughout  New  England  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Growing  out  of  the  excessive  use  of  New  England  rum  ? 

A.     They  thought  that  it  was  no  sin  to  use  liquor. 

Q.     There  was  then  an  excessive  use  of  New  England  rum,  was  there  not  ? 

A.     Horrible  ! 

Q.  And  that  use,  since  the  beginning  of  the  moral  reform,  has  been 
constantly  diminishing,  has  it  not  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  what  gave  rise  to  that  reformation  ?  In  what  did  it  originate  ? 
Was  there  any  law  by  which  those  oppressed,  down-trodden  and  almost 
helpless  people  were  lifted  up  ? 

A.  The  origin  of  the  movement  (for  I  was  invited  to  attend  one  of  the 
first  temperance  meetings  ever  held  in  this  country) — the  exact  origin  was 
this  :  A  man  was  riding  home 

Q.  I  do  not  want  a  story,  but  the  fact.  Did  that  reform  originate  in 'some 
external  law,  executed  by  the  bayonet,  or  by  legal  force,  or  in  a  moral 
conviction,  carried  home  to  the  hearts  and  the  judgment  of  men? 

A.  I  was  just  going  to  state  it.  A  man,  intoxicated,  sitting  on  the  tongue 
of  his  cart,  and  going  home,  fell  off  and  was  killed.  A  good  minister  saw  the 
accident.  "  For  God's  sake,"  said  he,  "  is  there  no  remedy  for  this  ?  "  He 
came  to  Boston,  and  formed  the  first  temperance  society.  That  was  the 
commencement  of  the  reform.  It  originated  in  the  moral  conviction  of  that 
minister  that  something  ought  to  be  done. 

Q.     And  the  people  began  to  understand  and  accept  the  principle  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  it  was  that,  which  was,  in  truth,  the  start  of  the  temperance 
reformation  ? 

A.  I  would  say  this,  that  every  reform  has  to  commence  as  a  moral  reform. 
When  it  gets  to  a  certain  point,  it  is  a  political  measure.  It  was  so  with 
slavery.  It  was  so  with  temperance.  When  that  reform  passes  from  the 
moral  stage,  to  a  political  stage,  the  conflict  essentially  ceases. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  cause  of  Christianity  (which  is  itself  a  moral 
cause,)  was  improved  when  it  ascended  the  throne  of  the  Caesars,  and  instead 
of  being  a  simple  and  humble  gospel,  preached  by  pious  men  and  accepted  by 
believing  hearts,  began  to  be  enforced  upon  unbelieving  and  unwilling  people 
by  magisterial  and  imperial  power,  as  the  second  stage  in  the  progressive 
history  of  the  Christian  religion  ?  Was  that  an  improvement  ? 

A.  Not  at  all.  It  was  a  corruption  of  Christianity.  Unquestionably  it 
was  not  an  improvement.  No  one  wishes  such  corruption  now,  for  they  have 
seen  the  effect  of  it.  , 

Q.  Is  not  intemperance,  or  drunkenness,  due  to  the  voluntary  use  of  intox- 
icating liquors  ?  Did  you  ever  know  it  to  be  due  to  the  involuntary  use,  or 
abuse,  of  intoxicating  liquors  ? 


494  APPENDIX. 

A.  Intemperance  is  owing,  to  a  great  extent,  to  the  temptations  that  are 
presented.  Remove  the  temptations  and  you  remove  it. 

Q.  Please  answer  my  question.  Drunkenness  is  owing  to  the  voluntary 
and  abusive  use  of  intoxicating  liquors,  is  it  not? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  of  course  it  is. 

Q.  Your  children,  and  mine,  if  they  live  long  enough,  will  at  some  time, 
travel  outside  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts  ? 

A.    I  have  no  doubt  of  that. 

Q.  Do  you  not  desire  to  have  your  children,  and  the  youth  of  the  Com- 
monwealth, raised  up  to  that  standard  of  manhood  that  will  enable  them  to 
live  beyond  the  dominion  of  our  own  laws  ? 

A.    Yes. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  any  virtue  in  a  young  man,  which  is  due  merely  to 
the  absence  of  an  opportunity  to  commit  a  vicious  act,  will  render  him  a  safe 
subject  to  be  trusted  beyond  the  reach  of  his  father's  eye,  or  the  lengtK  of  his 
mother's  apron-string  ? 

A.     Yes,  if  he  has  character  enough. 

Q.     But  you  must  cultivate  character  from  within  and  not  from  without. 

A.  '  I  try  to  do  that. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  not  understand  that  all  the  common 
people  of  Spain  drink  wine  as  their  common  drink  ? 

A.     So  far  as  they  are  able  to. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  Prof.  Agassiz  say  that  wine  was  the  common  drink  of  all 
the  people  of  Europe,  excepting  those  of  the  north  of  Europe  ? 

A.     I  did  not  hear  him  say  it,  but  I  have  no  doubt  that  it  is  a  fact. 

Q.  Do  you  understand,  or  do  you  know,  that  the  people  of  France  drink 
an  average  of  fifty  gallons  of  wine  for  each  man,  woman  and  child  in  the 
country,  per  annum  ? 

A .    I  do  not  know  that  fact. 

Q.     You  are  a  man  of  statistics  ? 

A.     I  cannot  have  statistics  of  every  kind. 

Q.     Have  you  never  understood  that  to  be  a  fact  ? 

A.  I  do  not  doubt  that  it  is  a  fact,  but  I  cannot  state  it  as  a  fact,  for  I  do 
not  know. 

Q.  I  suppose  the  children  and  the  women  do  not  drink  near  so  much  as 
the  men  ? 

A.    It  is  because  they  cannot  get  it. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  whether  you  suppose  that  one-fourth  the  people  of 
France  drink  all  the  wine  consumed  in  France,  as  Gov.  Andrew  states  ? 

A.     He  must  be  responsible  for  that  statement. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  virtue  would  be  promoted  by  abolishing  all  laws 
against  crime  and  vice  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     You  feel  it  your  duty  to  teach  your  children  to  go  to  church  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir  ;  and  to  go  with  them. 

Q.  And  you  try  to  give  them  the  right  sort  of  an  education  at  home,  and 
to  strengthen  them  against  the  temptations  of  life  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 


APPENDIX.  495 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  in  addition  to  this  influence,  it  is  necessary  to 
give  the  protection  of  the  law  against  temptation  ? 

A.     I  certainly  do. 

Q.  And  in  addition  to  all  this,  after  you  have  sent  them  to  school,  and  to 
church,  and  taught  them  by  good  influences  at  home,  and  enacted  good  laws, 
do  you  feel  yourself  released  from  the  duty  of  praying  that  they  may  not  be 
led  into  temptation  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

The  evidence  on  the  part  of  the  Remonstrants  was  suspended  for  the  pur- 
pose of  allowing  the  counsel  on  behalf  of  the  Petitioners  to  introduce  the 
testimony  of  Rev.  John  Todd,  of  Pittsfield,  after  which  the  hearing  of  the 
evidence  introduced  by  the  Remonstrants  was  resumed. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  JOHN  TODD. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.    I  reside  in  Pittsfield,  in  the  western  part  of  the  Commonwealth. 

Q.     You  are  a  clergyman  ? 

A.     I  am  pastor  of  the  First  Church  in  Pittsfield. 

Q.  Will  you  give  your  opinion  as  to  the  effect  upon  the  cause  of  temper- 
ance of  this  prohibitory  law  and  other  legislation  ? 

A .  I  feel  that  I  ought  right  here  to  say  that  I  do  not  want  to  be  put  into 
a  false  position,  and  I  do  not  intend  to  be.  I  do  not  intend  to  be  reckoned  in 
any  measure,  sort  or  way  as  adverse  to  the  temperance  cause  and  to  the 
highest  good  of  humanity.  I  have  been  an  old  laborer  in  this  cause.  It  is 
now  forty  years,  longer  than  the  most  of  this  audience  have  lived,  that  I  have 
been  an  advocate  of  total  abstinence.  I  have  preached  it  and  practised  it, 
and  labored  for  it  and  suffered  for  it,  and  have  been  persecuted  for  it.  I 
brought  up  a  family  of  seven  children,  neither  of  whom  ever  tasted  a  drop 
of  spirituous  or  vinous  liquor  until  they  were  admitted  to  the  church  and 
partook  at  the  communion  table.  I  was  laboring  in  this  cause  in  this  Com- 
monwealth from  the  year  1827  onward,  until  I  left  the  State  for  a  time,  and 
then  on  my  return  again.  I  do  not  think  the  present  generation  exactly 
understand  the  state  of  things  when  we  began  this  temperance  movement. 
They  do  not  remember  the  time  when  a  man  could  not  stand  up  in  a  meeting 
and  preach  temperance  without  endangering  himself  or  suffering  in  some 
way  therefrom.  Such  was  the  condition  of  things  when  we  began.  Every- 
body then  used  intoxicating  drinks.  At  the  first  funerals  I  attended  as  a 
minister,  they  had  rum  or  brandy-sling  and  handed  it  around — first  to  the 
minister  and  then  to  the  mourners  to  comfort  them,  and  the  bearers  had  a 
,  room  by  themselves.  That  is  a  specimen  of  the  customs  of  that  day.-  So  far 
was  this  custom  carried  that  on  one  occasion,  in  a  town  I  could  mention,  after 
the  funeral  service  and  before  the  coffin  was  carried  out,  they  had  the  tumblers 
and  decanters  on  the  table  and  the  coffin,  and  were  sweetening  and  mixing 
the  liquor.  In  the  town  in  which  I  settled,  the  farms  were  mostly  mortgaged 
and  the  people  were  in  debt,  and  it  was  said  that  20,000  gallons  of  liquor 
were  retailed  in  that  town,  although  not  all  of  it  was  used  there.  We  began 
to  preach  and  lecture  and  work  in  this  cause,  and  the  first  thing  that  I  did 


496  APPENDIX. 

was  to  get  the  church  to  pass  a  resolution,  by  vote  in  a  regular  church  meet- 
ing, that  they  would  not  have  liquor  at  funerals,  and  I  thought  that  was  a 
great  step.  Then  we  went  on  forming  societies  pledged  to  total  abstinence, 
until,  in  the  course  of  six  years,  it  was  entirely  changed  in  that  town — the 
town  of  Groton.  Liquor  was  not  to  be  had  there  and  was  not  used  there,  and 
I  am  glad  to  say  as  much  liquor  is  not  sold  there  as  in  other  places.  The 
power  then  used  for  the  suppression  of  intemperance,  was  a  pulpit  power, 
the  church  power,  the  gospel  power*  It  was  used  as  such  and  felt  as  such. 
After  the  time  of  the  Washingtonian  movement  it  was  different.  They  came 
in  with  a  sort  of  tidal  wave,  and  took  the  ground  that  temperance  was 
religion,  and  demanded  our  pulpits  upon  the  Sabbath,  and  demanded  that  we 
should  acknowledge  that  a  man  who  had  been  in  the  gutter  the  deepest  and 
the  longest  was  the  best  reformer.  They  took  that  ground,  and  shut  up  in  a 
measure  the  sympathies  of  clergymen  and  good  people  of  the  Commonwealth. 
That  was  but  for  a  time,  however.  Those  who  had  been  laborers  in  this 
cause  did  not  let  go.  They  held  on  to  it,  and  they  held  on  to  it  until  the  law 
took  it  out  of  their  hands.  Then  they  could  not  do  anything  more.  I  will 
tell  you  why.  My  own  observation  and  experience  are  that  human  nature  is 
in  ruins — the  soul,  the  mind  and  the  body.  We  are  told  that  perfect  health 
is  the  exception.  We  hardly  meet  a  man  who  has  not  some  defect,  some 
disease,  or  some  weak  spot  where  disease  is  looking  in,  and  where  he  feels 
there  is  danger:  and  moreover,  we  all  have  that  imperfection  of  bodily 
organization  by  which  our  whole  being  is  affected  by  the  state  of  our  nerves. 
The  nervous  power  is  that  which  controls.  I  used  to  laugh  when  I  heard 
men  say  that  they  would  drink  because  it  was  hot  and  then  because  it  was 
cold,  and  then  because  it  was  wet  and  then  because  it  was  dry,  and  then 
because  there  was  dust  in  the  street.  All  these  were  considered  occasions  for 
drinking,  and  they  were  causes  for  drinking.  The  body  felt  uneasy  in  heat 
and  in  cold,  in  dust  and  in  rain — the  body  felt  uneasy,  and  the  quickest  way 
to  allay  that  uneasiness  was  to  take  something  that  would  touch  the  nerves  and 
thus  make  a  man  feel  better.  This  is  the  philosophy  of  drinking.  It  is  not 
the  taste  or  the  appetite,  but  the  uneasy  sensation  of  human  nature  that 
tempts  men  to  drink.  There  are  three  things  that  will  affect  the  nerves  and 
relieve  this  unpleasant  feeling — alcohol,  opium  and  tobacco,  in  some  form 
or  another.  The  most  destructive  of  these  to  the  human  system  is  opium. 
There  are  no  people  in  the  world  so  degraded,  and  where  human  nature  is  so 
low  and  so  beastly,  as  where  they  use  opium  the  most.  We  do  not  attempt 
to  touch  the  use  of  that  by  the  law,  because  we  do  not  use  that  narcotic  to 
any  great  extent.  Of  tobacco  I  need  not  say  much  here,  because  it  has  too 
many  friends  ;  but  alcohol  is  the  article  that  is  cheapest,  nearest  at  hand  and 
most  easily  obtained.  The  result  is,  that  it  is  the  chief  article  upon  which 
man  puts  his  hand  to  relieve  him  in  his  distress.  If  he  has  a  pain  iii  his 
stomach,  or  if  he  is  travelling  in  the  cars  and  is  afraid  of  this  or  that,  he  has  a 
little  flask,  and  takes  a  little  something  because  it  will  relieve  him  the  quickest. 
It  is  not  appetite  alone  that  prompts  him  to  do  it,  but  the  use  grows  out  of 
human  nature.  What  the  law  wants  to  do  is  to  get  in  and  help  humanity  in 
her  need  so  far  as  the  law  can  go.  But  we  all  allow  that  every  man  stands  or 
falls  of  himself.  He  has  the  power  of  buying  opium,  going  home  and  eating 


APPENDIX.  497 

it,  and  the  law  cannot  touch  him.  The  law  cannot  prevent  the  use  of  tobacco. 
The  law  cannot  touch  it.  The  question  is,  How  far  can  the  law  touch  the 
man  who  wants  to  relieve  himself  from  pain  and  trouble  by  drinking  ?  Where 
can  the  law  come  in  ?  The  great  difficulty  then  in  legislation  upon  this  point, 
it  seems  to  me,  lies  in  human  nature.  It  lies  in  the  wants  and  woes  of  humanity. 
So  far  as  law  can  come  in  and  bring  relief,  in  the  name  of  mercy  let  us  have  it. 
There  is  another  thing  to  be  noticed  at  this  time ;  in  regard  to  the  medical 
faculty.  I  see  that  some  gentlemen  smile  at  the  mention  of  the  medical  faculty, 
but  it  is  a  matter  of  fact  that  physicians  in  this  city  and  in  my  place  prescribe 
alcohol  tenfold  more  than  they  did  twenty-five  years  ago,  and,  I  think,  more 
than  they  did  forty  years  ago.  I  have  studied  to  know  the  reason  of  this. 
When  a  man  is  in  danger  of  paralysis,  they  give  him  a  stimulant.  If  he  has 
pneumonia,  they  give  him  tonic.  They  use  tenfold  more  stimulants  and 
tonics  than  they  formerly  did.  I  have  been  studying  the  reason.  I  do  not 
believe  it  is  the  mere  fashion  of  the  community.  I  believe  it  lies  deeper  than 
fashion.  I  do  not  believe  that  fashion  can  take  men  so  well  educated  and  so 
high-minded  as  the  physicians  of  New  England,  and  make  them  more  or  less 
fall  into  this  practice.  I  feel  that  the  cause  lies  deeper  than  fashion.  Phy- 
sicians will  tell  you  that  it  lies  in  human  nature.  They  will  tell  you  that  we 
have  fallen  upon  a  generation  of  feeble  folks.  They  have  to  give  us  iron  and 
tonics  and  alcoholic  stimulants  as  medicines.  I  am  sure  I  speak  within 
bounds  when  I  say  that  such  things  are  given  tenfold  now  more  than  formerly. 
Whether  physicians  are  wise  in  this,  whether  or  not  the  after  effects  are  not 
worse  than  they  otherwise  would  be,  I  cannot  say.  I  am  only  speaking  of  a 
matter  of  fact,  and  that  fact  I  think  should  enter  into  the  legislation  upon  this 
subject.  You  ask  the  reason  why  the  pulpits  and  the  churches  of  the  Com- 
monwealth and  of  New  England  stand  back.  Why  can  they  not  use  the  same 
power  that  they  did  forty  years  ago  ?  Why  can  they  not,  by  lectures  and 
preaching  and  moral  means,  produce  the  same  results  as  then  ?  The  reason 
has  been  assigned  by  Mr.  Walker,  that  when  human  law  comes  in,  the  moral 
power  of  the  pulpit  can  go  no  farther.  You  will  see  at  once  that  the 
moment  I  attempt  to  rouse  up  my  community  upon  this  subject  the  result  is,  I 
put  them  all  to  prosecuting.  If  there  is  anything  done  they  will  enforce  the 
Maine  Law.  Perhaps  they  ought  to,  but  it  puts  the  pulpit  in  an  attitude  of 
being  a  prosecutor,  and  it  puts  ministers  in  an  attitude  that  they  cannot  be  in 
and  still  maintain  their  usefulness  in  our  day  and  generation.  We  must  live 
in  the  sympathies  and  confidence  of  the  people  or  our  usefulness  is  at  an  end. 
That  is  the  reason  why  we  cannot  co-operate.  It  is  not  because  we  have  lost 
interest  in  the  temperance  cause.  We  feel  as  much  for  humanity,  for  her 
degradation,  for  her  distress,  as  we  ever  did  ;  but  if  the  law  comes  in  we  can- 
not act  as  formerly.  The  law  has  taken  the  work  out  of  our  hands.  That 
has  been  the  trouble  with  the  pulpit  for  the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years.  And  I 
have  never  been  in  favor  of  the  law  for  that  reason.  There  is  another 
trouble ;  that  is,  the  moment  the  law  takes  hold  of  a  question,  which  is,  perhaps, 
a  moral  question,  a  question  in  a  great  measure  between  a  man's  conscience 
and  his  God  — the  moment  the  law  comes  in  and  takes  hold  of  it,  it  becomes 
a  political  question,  and  from  that  question  the  ministry  are  shut  out.  They 
cannot  go  into  politics,  they  cannot  take  any  stand  when  a  question  becomes 
63 


498  APPENDIX. 

a  political  one.  I  do  not  know  but  that  is  the  case  here.  If  it  is  I  am  very 
sorry  for  it,  I  am  very  sorry  to  be  here.  If  it  is  not  now  a  political  question 
and  this  goes  on,  it  must  become  so.  It  is  apparent  to  every  one  that  with 
this  state  of  things,  with  the  medical  faculty  standing  as  they  do,  with  human 
nature  crying  as  she  does  for  something  that  wyill  bring  temporary  relief, 
even  if  it  injures  the  system,  I  take  it  there  must  be  places  where  alcoholic 
liquors  ace  sold.  The  Commonwealth  takes  the  same  view.  There  is  another 
difficulty.  I  cannot  make  my  people  feel  that  the  sale  of  liquor  is  an  unright- 
eous business  when  the  agent  of  the  Commonwealth  keeps  a  bar  and  says, 
"You  may  buy  here  and  buy  in  any  quantity."  But  when  a  man  next  door 
does  the  same  thing  he  will  be  put  in  jail.  It  is  wrong  teaching.  My  own 
view  is,  that  the  Commonwealth  must  make  her  appointments  of  those  who 
shall  sell  liquor,  and  such  appointments  must  be  under  the  control  of  the  law 
and  under  the  directions  of  the  Commonwealth ;  but  I  doubt  very  much 
whether  the  influence  of  such  appointments  has  not  been  to  demoralize  the 
consciences  of  the  people  in  that  respect.  The  Commonwealth  offers  to  sell 
liquor  as  a  medicine.  The  guardian  of  your  children  and  home  may  sell,  but 
private  citizens  must  not.  If  they  do,  they  are  wrong-doers.  Take  a  town, 
the  population  of  which  is  ten  thousand,  one-third  of  whom  are  foreigners, 
a  town  where  the  railroads  centre.  These  places  are  open  for  the  sale  of 
liquor.  The  little  villages  around  can  shut  up  their  stores  and  bring  in  this 
prohibitory  law  and  carry  it  out  and  all  the  principal  men  of  the  town  will 
help  in  the  work.  They  can  do  it  because  they  do  not  want  drunkards  made 
there.  They  had  rather  go  to  Boston  and  somewhere  else  and  get  their 
liquor,  or  have  it  sent  to  them  by  express.  You  would  be  very  much  surprised 
could  you  hear  a  revelation  made  by  the  express  companies  as  to  the  quantity 
bought  in  Boston  and  carried  to  the  country  towns  and  villages  where  the 
people  do  not  want  to  buy  it  at  home.  In  our  town  we  have  not  only  a  popu- 
lation of  ten  thousand,  but  we  have  ten,  thousand  dry  ones  around  us  who 
come  in  there  to  drink.  The  profits  of  the  business  are  so  great  that  we  have 
not,  or  at  least  we  have  not  been  able  to,  shut  up  the  sale.  We  have  had  this 
law  in  operation  for  fifteen  years,  but  are  not  as  well  off  now  as  when  this 
law  was  put  in  operation,  in  my  own  community.  There  was  a  time  when  this 
law  was  first  promulgated  that  everybody  thought  that  they  would  be  put  in 
jail  if  they  sold  liquor,  but  I  should  be  sorry  now  to  tell  the  number  of 
places  where  it  could  be  bought.  I  do  not  think,  however,  that  our  town  in 
that  respect  is  any  worse  than  other  places  of  the  same  size. 

I  have  one  other  suggestion  to  make.  Suppose  there  could  not  be  a  gallon 
of  liquor  bought  in  Boston,  and  we  could  not  send  by  our  express  companies 
to  procure  it,  it  would  be  no  great  inconvenience  to  us  to  send  to  some  town 
on  the  Hudson  and  get  it.  But  suppose  that  the  rest  of  the  Commonwealth 
could  not  procure  it  here  or  elsewhere,  what  would  be  the  result  ?  My  opin- 
ion is  that  the  whole  Commonwealth  would  rise  up  and  throw  off  the  law  and 
open  the  gates  for  anybody  to  sell.  You  will  ask  me  why  I  think  this  license 
law  will  work  better  than  a  prohibitory  law.  I  am  unable  to  speak  of  the 
future,  but  only  of  the  past.  Gentlemen  intimate  that  this  law  is  being  put 
in  operation  here,  and  that  it  is  doing  wonders  in  Boston.  I  am  glad  to  hear 
of  it,  for  we  never  heard  of  the  sale  being  suppressed  in  Boston  before.  If 


APPENDIX.  499 

this  law  can  do  it,  God  speed  it.  I  am  only  speaking  of  what  it  has  done  in 
the  last  fifteen  years  that  it  has  been  upon  our  statute  books.  There  was  a 
time  when  the  influence  of  the  pulpit  and  the  moral  sentiment  of  the  commu- 
nity was  such,  that  nobody  in  our  place  would  offer  another  wine  or  brandy, 
or  anything  of  the  kind.  I  am  sorry  to  say  that  it  is  otherwise  now.  I  am 
sorry  to  say,  that  while  it  is  hardly  fashionable  for  young  men  to  go  into  saloons 
and  drink  at  the  bars,  nevertheless,  there  are  little  drinking  clubs  made  up  by 
our  young  men,  who  buy  liquor  and  drink  it  in  their  rooms,  and  drink  it  more 
than  ever  before.  I  think  if  we  had  even  a  small  percentage  of  omniscience, 
that  we  would  find  these  little  drinking  clubs  all  over  the  Commonwealth.  I 
cannot  say  what  would  be  the  effect  of  a  different  law,  but  we  have  not 
received  the  benefit  we  expected  from  the  present  law.  If  a  change  is  to  be 
made,  I  want  it  to  be  made  in  such  a  way  that  we  can  bring  in  the  influence 
of  the  pulpit  and  the  moral  power  of  our  churches  once  more,  and  enable  us 
to  effect  more  by  such  means  for  the  cause  of  temperance  and  for  the  salva- 
tion of  the  human  body  and  mind,  and  for  the  peace  of  families,  than  could 
be  done  in  any  other  way.  I  speak  this  after  an  experience  of  forty  years, 
not  because  I  have  any  partiality  for  any  particular  policy  of  legislation,  but 
because  I  have  seen  and  known  the  effect  of  moral  power.  When  you  appeal 
to  the  consciences  of  the  people  and  strike  home  conviction  to  their  hearts, 
such  influences  have  greater  power  than  the  fear  of  the  jail  or  the  State 
Constabulary. 

Q.  The  question  has  been  asked  during  this  investigation,  whether  the 
moral  efforts  that  characterized  the  earlier  progress  of  the  temperance  refor- 
mation may  not  be  employed  in  aiding  the  enforcement  of  the  present 
prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  have  stated  that  there  are  two  difficulties  in  the  way.  One  is  that 
you  put  the  ministry  (and  that  is  still  a  power  in  Massachusetts)  in  the  posi- 
tion of  being  either  a  politician  or  an  executor  of  the  law,  or  both,  in  the 
view  of  men,  and  you  thereby  destroy  their  power  quo  ad  hoc.  I  wish  to  say 
in  regard  to  beer,  that  while  I  think  it  is  not  as  intoxicating  as  other  drinks, 
it  demoralizes  awfully.  We  have  a  large  population  of  foreigners  with  us, 
and  beer  is  their  chief  drink.  It  makes  them  besotted.  It  makes  them  cross. 
It  makes  their  homes  unpleasant.  It  prevents  them  from  rising  in  civilization. 
It  shuts  them  out  from  the  influence  of  everything  that  is  ennobling. 

Q.  So  far  as  you  have  associated  with  clergymen  of  your  own  denomina- 
tion, what  have  you  found  to  be  the  opinion  generally  entertained  in  regard 
to  this  prohibitory  law  interfering  with  the  influence  of  the  pulpit  ? 

A.  I  could  not  say  further  than  that  they  have  been  prevented  from 
laboring  as  formerly.  I  cannot  say  how  they  feel. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     How  long  have  you  preached  at  Pittsfield  ? 

A.    Twenty-five  years. 

Q.    Do  you  recollect  the  Washingtonian  reform  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you  to  say  that  the  moral  efforts  that  you  speak  of  as 
so  effective  ceased  after  the  enactment  of  this  law  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  think  the  moral  sympathies  of  those  who  had  been  engaged 
in  the  work  were  lessened  by  the  Washingtonian  movement,  because  they 


500  APPENDIX. 

repudiated  us  old  stagers,  and  set  us  aside  as  being  old  fogies.  But  we  labored 
on,  notwithstanding,  up  to  the  time  of  the  passage  of  this  law,  then  we  felt 
that  a  new  experiment  was  about  to  be  tried  by  the  Commonwealth,  and  we 
could  do  no  more. 

Q.  Was  it  not  generally  the  case,  that  when  the  Washingtonian  reform 
commenced,  the  movement  was  so  novel,  so  exciting,  that  the  interest  in  the 
ordinary  modes  of  operation  abated  ?  Did  not  the  Washingtonian  leaders 
take  the  work  from  the  hands  of  the"  ministers,  and  the  more  sober  laborers  in 
the  cause  ? 

A .    Measurably,  they  did. 

Q.    Was  it  not  so  generally  ? 

A.    I  can  only  speak  for  our  county. 

Q.     How  long  ago  was  that  ? 

A.    I  do  not  remember  the  year. 

Q.  Do  you  not  call  to  mind  that  it  commenced  here  in  Boston  in  the  spring 
of  1841 ? 

A.     I  went  to  Berkshire  in  1842,  and  it  came  there  very  soon  after. 

Q.    Where  were  you  previous  to  that  ? 

A.     In  Philadelphia. 

Q.     Did  the  movement  commence  in  Philadelphia  before  you  left  there  ? 

A.    No,  sir  ;  it  commenced  first  in  Baltimore,  and  then  in  Boston. 

Q.  Did  not  the  Washingtonians  take  the  ground  pretty  much  into  their 
own  hands? 

A.    I  think  that  for  a  time  they  did. 

Q.  After  that  movement  had  abated,  did  the  churches  and  ministers  and 
temperance  people  go  to  work  in  their  way  as  actively  as  they  had  been 
working  before  ? 

A.  Perhaps  not  quite  as  actively.  In  our  town  we  did,  and  I  think  more 
so,  for  we  felt  that  we  had  lost  ground,  and  made  efforts  to  regain  it.  I  think 
we  never  made  greater  efforts  than  we  did  then. 

Q.    But  are  you  not  aware  that  that  was  not  the  common  state  of  tilings  ? 

A.  I  should  think  that  it  was  not.  I  do  not  know  as  I  ought  to  speak  for 
others,  but  I  speak  for  our  county.  That  was  the  case  with  us. 

Q.  Mr.  Child  testified  two  years  ago  that  the  reform  culminated  about  the 
year  1845 ;  would  you  not  assent  to  that  statement,  as  well  as  you  can 
recollect  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  as  to  the  exact  culmination.  We  did  not  cease  efforts 
until  this  law  was  enacted.  I  cannot  tell  you  of  the  very  summit  of  the  effort, 
but  I  think  that  it  was  about  that  time. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  there  were  many  total  abstinence  sermons 
preached  in  Pittsfield  from  1845  to  1852  ? 

A.    I  preached  a  good  many. 

Q.  What  are  the  habits  of  Pittsfield  generally,  compared  with  the  habits 
of  the  people  of  other  places  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know,  sir.  We  are  a  very  respectable  people.  I  will  say 
that,  as  a  general  thing,  what  we  call  the  middling  class  of  society  are  there 
very  temperate. 


APPENDIX.  501 

Q.  Intemperance  is  chiefly  found  among  the  lower  classes  and  the  rich 
manufacturers,  is  it  not  ? 

A.  I  do  not  want  to  use  the  word  intemperance.  Vinous  and  spirituous 
liquors  are  used  by  the  two  classes.  I  do  not  think  it  would  be  right  to  call 
them  intemperate,  for  I  do  not  know  exactly  where  that  point  is. 

Q.  There  have  been  no  total  abstinence  sermons,  of  any  consequence, 
preached  there,  since  this  law  was  enacted  ? 

A.    I  cannot  speak  for  other  pulpits. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  a  man  who  disapproves  of  this  law  is  debarred, 
because  of  the  law,  from  preaching  the  simple  duty  of  total  abstinence  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  That  is  not  the  point.  The  point  is  that  if  you  effect  any 
thing,  you  must  move  the  whole  community,  and  if  you  move  them  they  at 
once  take  hold  of  this  law  and  use  it. 

Q.    Have  you  observed  the  temperance  movement  for  the  last  year  or  two  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  it  not  patent  to  your  mind  that  there  is  more  moral  effort  now  than 
there  has  boen  at  any  time  within  the  last  twenty  years  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  can  say  that.  Do  you  mean  in  behalf  of  tem- 
perance ? 

Q.  In  behalf  of  practical  total  abstinence,  by  distributing  the  pledge, 
preaching  the  necessity  of  total  abstinence,  forming  Bands  of  Hope,  organizing 
the  Sabbath  Schools  in  temperance  societies,  etc. 

A.  I  cannot  speak  of  other  places,  but  I  can  of  my  own.  We  carried 
this  movement  all  along  through  the  war.  We  got  our  children  interested  as 
far  as  we  could.  We  tried  to  bring  up  Bands  of  Hope,  and  to  bring  them  up 
rightly. 

Q.     Do  you  find  any  difficulty  with  your  children  ? 

A.     No,  sir ;  the  difficulty  is  with  the  grown-up  people. 

Q.  Is  there  any  obstacle  in  the  way  of  your  preaching  to  your  congrega- 
tion the  necessity  of  total  abstinence  '? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     Why  do  you  not  do  it  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.     Then  what  is  the  trouble  ?     You  said  this  state  of  things  prevented  ? 

A.  I  said  that  this  law  was  an  obstacle,  not  in  preaching  what  I  believe 
to  be  the  truth,  but  it  is  an  obstacle  to  my  usefulness  in  this  cause.  I  cannot 
get  up  the  temperance  societies,  and  get  them  to  sign  the  pledge  as  they  did 
formerly.  The  people  rely  upon  this  law,  and  not  upon  the  pulpit. 

Q.  But  you  say  that  you  can  get  up  Bands  of  Hope,  and  get  everybody  to 
sign  the  pledge  ? 

A.    I  do  not  say  that  I  can  get  everybody  ;  I  wish  that  I  could. 

Q.  Can  you  not  get  them  to  sign  the  pledge  just  as  easily  as  if  there  were 
no  law  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Suppose  you  have  some  rich  wine-drinkers  in  your  church  ;  would  you 
not  be  just  as  clear  to  preach  the  necessity  of  giving  up  the  use  of  wine  now 
as  you  ever  was  in  the  world  ? 


502  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  seem  to  be  unfortunate  in  expression.  The  obstacle  is  this  :  I  cannot 
move  my  community  in  the  temperance  cause,  or  seek  to  induce  them  to  give 
up  drinking,  and  to  shut  up  the  rum-holes,  without  appearing  before  the  com- 
munity as  a  setter-on  of  the  laAv-folks.  I  only  spoke  of  it  as  an  obstacle  to 
the -influence  of  the  pulpit. 

Q.  But  supposing  you  preach  total  abstinence  sermons  ?  You  can  say,  I 
suppose  that  you  do  not  believe  in  this  law,  but  that  you  believe  in  the  duty 
of  practical  temperance  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  if  you  had  ten  rich  wine-drinkers  in  your  church,  you  would  feel 
it  necessary  to  convert  those  people  to  temperance,  would  you  not  ? 

A.  If  you  doubt  whether  or  not  they  have  temperance  sermons  preached, 
just  ask  them. 

Q.  I  ask  you.  Supposing  you  felt  that  to  be  a  great  evil,  and  you  made  up 
your  mind  to  preach  five  sermons  upon  the  duty  of  total  abstinence ;  you 
accordingly  write  them  and  earnestly  preach  them  to  those  ten  wine-drinkers. 
What  would  the  law  have  to  do  with  that  ? 

A.    Nothing,  as  I  know  of. 

Q.    It  is  desirable  for  them  to  reform? 

A.     Very. 

Q.    Would  they  not  think  of  what  their  minister  said  ? 

A.    I  hope  that  they  do,  but  I  do  not  know. 

Q.  Is  it  not  possible  that  there  are  some  ministers  so  situated  that  they  have 
these  ten  rich  wine-drinkers  in  their  churches,  and  would  like  to  see  them 
reform,  but  fear  that  it  would  make  trouble  if  they  were  to  tell  them  that  they 
ought  to  reform  ? 

A.    I  believe  there  may  be  such  ministers,  but  I  am  not  one  of  them. 

Q.  But  do  you  not  suppose  that  there  are  some  ministers  who  would  be 
very  glad  to  shelter  themselves  under  the  idea  that  this  plaguey  law  is  mak- 
ing all  this  fuss  ? 

A.     Perhaps  ;  I  cannot  speak  of  others. 

Q.  Is  there  really  any  difficulty  in  your  preaching  right  at  those  ten  rich 
wine-drinkers  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  can  preach  to  them,  or  to  any  other  ten  men ;  but  that  does 
sot  meet  my  difficulty. 

Q,     Let  me  ask  you  if  you  do  it  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Do  they  leave  off? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Do  they  say  they  do  not  because  of  the  law  ? 

A .  I  do  not  know  what  they  say ;  I  presume  not.  I  do  not  want  to  be 
understood  as  testifying  that  there  are  ten  rich  wine-drinkers  in  my  church. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  preach  total  abstinence  sometimes.  Have  you,  within 
twenty  years,  preached  an  earnest  discourse  to  your  people,  saying  to  them 
that  it  is  their  duty  to  give  up  wine  entirely  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  and  I  can  give  you  the  text. 

Q.    What  is  it? 


APPENDIX.  503 

A.  It  was  in  Proverbs :  "  When  thou  seest  thy  neighbor  drawn  away  to 
ruin  ; "  and  the  illustration  was  that  in  case  of  a  man  coming  down  from  the 
mountain,  and  throwing  a  rope  around  their  children  and  dragging  them 
away,  it  was  their  duty  to  step  in  and  prevent  it  by  any  sacrifice,  or  by  any 
self-denial. 

Q.  But  they  do  not  see  that  rope  working  in  that  way,  when  they  drink 
their  wine  ? 

A.     This  was  preaching  in  favor  and  in  aid  of  this  law. 

Q.     What  was  ? 

At.  This  illustration  that  I  was  just  giving.  That  was  as  far  as  I  could  go 
in  favor  of  the  law,  and  in  favor  of  putting  it  in  operation. 

Q.  I  believe  that  you  are  a  thorough  total  abstinence  man,  and  think 
better  of  you  than  it  is  proper  to  speak  here 

A.     Thank  you. 

Q.  But  I  want  to  know  whether  you  have  said  to  such  ones  in  your  con- 
gregation as  may  be  in  the  habit  of  drinking, — "  Gentlemen,  this  is  a  wicked 
habit ;  you  ought  to  give  it  up ;  you  ought  to  abstain  totally  from  intoxicating 
liquors  as  a  beverage  ?  "  How  do  you  think  that  ten  wine-drinkers  in  a 
Methodist  Church  would  get  along  if  the  rules  were  enforced  ?  Do  you  ever 
preach  such  sermons  as  they  preach  ? 

A.  I  do  not  suppose  that  I  preach  as  good  ones,  but  I  preach  the  best  that 
I  can. 

,Q.  Well,  on  that  subject,  I  do  not  believe  that  you  do  ;  on  other  subjects 
you  probably  do.  You  have  preached  a  good  many  temperance  sermons,  I 
suppose  ? 

A.    In  my  day,  I  have. 

Q.     Have  you  preached  many  lately  ? 

A.  I  preach  on  temperance  as  often  as  I  think  that  it  is  a  part  of  giving 
to  every  man  his  portion  in  due  season. 

Q.    You  have  done  that  since  the  law  has  been  in  operation,  have  you  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    What,  then,  is  the  trouble  ? 

A.  The  trouble  is  what  I  have  tried  to  state.  This  law  cuts  me  off  from 
the  sympathy  of  the  community,  and  takes  away  my  moral  power. 

Q.     Do  they  understand  that  you  are  opposed  to  this  law  ? 

A.  No,  they  do  not.  They  understand  that  I  want  intemperance  ban- 
ished as  far  as  possible,  and  that  every  proper  means  should  be  used  to  secure 
that  end.  What  I  desire  to  testify  here,  is  my  conviction,  from  observation, 
of  the  power  of  this  machinery  to  do  it.  I  am  in  sympathy  with  everything 
that  will  help  humanity. 

Q.     Suppose  your  preaching  were  to  set  people  on  to  enforce  the  law  ? 

A.    It  does  not  do  it. 

Q.    I  suppose  that  your  preaching  would  not. 

A.    No,  nor  any  other  preaching  that  we  have  in  our  town.  » 

Q.     Then  you  have  not  much  liquor-law  preaching  in  your  place  ? 

Mr.  CHILD.     What  sort  of  sermons  do  you  want  preached  V 


504  APPENDIX. 

Mr.  SPOONER.  I  want  Dr.  Todd  and  other  ministers  to  say, — "  Consider- 
ing the  danger  and  influence  of  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors,  it  is  your  duty 
to  lay  them  aside  entirely." 

Dr.  TODD.     I  have  said  that  in  my  pulpit  within  four  weeks. 

Q.  From  your  talk  you  seem  to  have  been  preaching  a  good  deal  on  tem- 
perance ? 

A.     I  have. 

Q.  But  you  have  testified  that  this  law  has  kept  people  from  talking  upon 
the  subject  of  practical  temperance  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir  ;  I  think  it  has. 

Q.  You  are  in  favor  of  a  license  law,  I  suppose.  How  many  sellers  would 
you  license  in  Boston  ? 

A.  In  one  hundred  and  ninety  thousand  people  I  do  not  know  how  many 
persons  I  should  license,  but  I  would  have  the  charge  for  a  license  very  high. 

Q.     So  as  to  deprive  the  poor  people  from  from  the  power  of  selling  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir, — but  that  is  not  the  right  way  to  put  it.  I  would  have  the 
law  the  best  that  human  wisdom  can  devise.  I  do  not  want  to  make  any  dis- 
tinction between  the  poor  and  the  rich.  I  know  that  since  we  have  the  man- 
ner of  men  that  we  have — since  we  have  the  human  nature  that  we  have, 
intoxicating  liquors  will  be  sold  and  will  be  bought,  and  all  the  laws  that  man 
may  pass  cannot  prevent  it.  Still  we  must  do  all  that  we  can  by  both  the 
law  and  the  gospel. 

Q.  That  is  our  doctrine.  We  would  use  both  the  law  and  the  gospel.  We 
are  trying  to  learn  what  sort  of  a  law  will  be  best. 

A.    I  cannot  say. 

Q.  I  think  that  you  have  expressed  an  opinion.  Do  you  not  give  the 
preference  to  a  license  law  ? 

A .  I  only  expressed  an  opinion  as  to  the  inefficiency  of  the  present  law  as 
executed  heretofore.  I  understand  there  has  been  a  great  revival  of  the  law 
in  Boston.  I  hope  it  will  continue. 

Q.     Do  you  recollect  the  time  when  licenses  were  granted  ? 

A.    I  never  knew  much  about  the  old  license  law. 

Q.     But  you  recollect  the  time  when  when  we  used  to  have  licenses  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  the  traffic  being  at  all  restricted  by  the  license 
law  ? 

A.     I  think  that  it  was  very  much  then  as  it  is  now ;  about  everybody  sold  ? 

Q.     Both  the  licensed  and  the  unlicensed  ? 

A.  I  know  that  the  man  who  sold  whiskey  one  or  two  cents  per  gallon 
cheaper  than  the  others,  was  called  the  cheap  store  of  the  place.  The  law 
then  did  not  affect  the  sale,  and  it  does  not  now. 

Q.     Do  you  say  that  everybody  sold  then  ? 

A.    No ;  I  do  not  say  that  everybody  did,  but  a  great  many  did. 

Q.     Tfye  law  did  nothing  to  restrain  the  sale  ? 

A.     I  cannot  tell.     I  do  not  know  much  about,  licenses  in  this  State. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  now  advisable  to  give  up  the  present  policy  of  prohibi- 
tion and  go  back  to  the  old  license  system,  which  did  so  little  towards 
restraining  the  traffic,  or  shall  we  try  the  experiment  of  prohibition  longer  ? 


APPENDIX.  505 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  I  can  judge  of  that.  I  do  not  speak  thus  because 
I  want  to  dodge  the  question,  but  because  I  do  not  know  which  would  be 
better.  I  do  not  know  what  effect  a  license  law  would  have.  I  do  not  know 
whether  a  license  law  could  be  executed  or  not ;  if  it  cannot  be,  it  would  be 
no  better  than  the  present  law,  which  for  the  last  fifteen  years  has  been  a 
dead  failure. 

Q.     Have  you  any  doubt  about  its  being  executed  better  hereafter  ? 
A.    I  cannot  say. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  it  better,  as  the  matter  now  stands,  to  pursue  the 
present  policy  instead  of  giving  it  up  ? 

A.  I  do  not  feel  that  I  am  bound  to  testify  upon  that  point.  I  merely 
wanted  to  show  the  great  difficulty  that  the  pastors  of  the  churches  of  Massa- 
chusetts have  labored  under,  and  I  think  that  I  have  done  that. 

Q.     Do  you  now,  as  circumstances  stand,  express  yourself  as  decidedly  in 
favor  of  a  license  law,  as  compared  with  the  present  law  ? 
A.     Unless  it  is  executed  better  than  it  has  eyer  yet  been. 
Q.     Just  as  you  understand  the  matter  to  stand  at  this  moment,  do  you 
think  it  advisable  to  say  that  the  State  cannot  enforce  the  present  law,  and 
therefore  it  is  best  to  go  back  to  a  license  law  ? 

A.  I  have  very  little  expectation  or  hope  that  this  law  will  be  executed. 
From  what  I  know  of  human  nature,  and  from  what  I  have  seen  for  the  last 
fifteen  years,  my  impression  is  that  as  the  law  cannot  prohibit  the  use  of 
liquor,  nor  banish  it,  the  State  must  regulate  the  sale  as  well  as  it  can.  I  do 
not  want  to  be  misunderstood.  You  have  not  yet  carried  the  consciences  of 
the  community  to  the  point  of  feeling  that  the  sale  of  liquor  is  sinful.  It  is 
the  conscience  of  the  world  that  is  sinful  to  commit  adultery,  or  steal,  or  com- 
mit arson.  Adultery,  theft  and  arson  are  universally  regarded  as  sins,  as 
crimes  against  which  the  laws  can  be  executed.  In  a  republican  government, 
a  law  against  an  act  which  the  consciences  of  the  people  do  not  feel  to  be  a 
sin,  can  hardly  be  executed. 

Q.     What  do  you  think  of  the  Sunday  law,  would  you  repeal  that  ? 
A.     I  do  not  know  enough  about  it  to  say.     It  does  no  good  with  us  ;  I  do 
not  know  as  it  does  any  good  anywhere. 

Q.  We  enforce  it  here  so  as  to  shut  up  all  these  shops  on  Sunday.  Does 
not  this  traffic  stand  pretty  much  on  the  same  ground  as  gambling,  horse- 
racing,  etc.  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  it  does. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  that  the  consciences  of  the  people  of  Massachu- 
setts— of  the  majority  of  the  people — arc  in  favor  of  this  law  ? 

A.  Put  up  this  question,  make  it  a  political  question,  and  submit  it  to 
the  people  of  Massachusetts,  and  I  think  they  would  ride  over  your  law. 

Q,  How  is  it  that  we  have  had  this  law  on  the  statute  books  for  fifteen 
years  ?  It  has  been  in  politics  every  year,  and  yet  been  sustained  right 
straight  along  ? 

A.  It  has  not  been  so  before  the  people  in  our  part,  as  to  make  the  elec- 
tion turn  upon  that  point. 

Q.     If  the  State  is  dissatisfied  with  the  law,  is  it  reasonable  to  suppose  that 
it  would  be  allowed  to  remain  on  the  statute  book  for  fifteen  years  ? 
64 


506  APPENDIX. 

A.  The  present  movement,  I  think,  shows  that  the  State  is  not  satisfied 
with  the  law. 

Q.     Whence  did  this  movement  originate  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know. 

Q.     Who  do  you  suppose  pays  these  honorable  counsel  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  anything  about  it. 

Q.     Have  you  any  sort  of  doubt  that  it  is  the  liquor-dealers  of  Boston  ? 

A.    I  know  nothing  at  all  about  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  Suppose  the  Legislature  should  pass  a  law  by 
which  each  town  in  the  State  should  "have  the  right,  each  year,  to  decide 
whether  it  would  permit  any  sale  of  liquor  in  its  limits  or  not,  whether  it 
would  license  at  all  or  not,  and  if  so,  to  what  extent ;  do  you  not  believe, 
under  such  circumstances,  that  the  constant  agitation  and  discussion  of  that 
question  each  year  would  have  a  beneficial  effect  upon  the  community  ? 

A.  I  am  not  able  to  answer  that  question  categorically.  I  am  confident 
that  in  our  region  somebody  would  be  licensed.  The  State  Agency  would  die 
in  that  case.  Somebody  would  be  licensed  by  the  town.  The  subject 
would  be  agitated ;  there  would  be  temperance  selectmen  and  opposition. 
How  much  this  discussion  would  effect  in  the  abatement  of  drinking,  I  do  not 
know.  We  think  it  better  to  keep  the  water  running  than  to  have  it  stag- 
nate. There  is  one  difficulty  in  the  matter :  several  times  we  have  got  our 
town  to  vote  so  much  money  to  the  selectmen  with  which  to  enforce  this  pro- 
hibitory law,  but  they  have  never  done  it.  We  can  never  get  them  to  do  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  Supposing  one  town  should  grant  licenses,  and  an 
adjoining  one  did  not ;  would  not  the  facility  with  which  liquor  could  be 
obtained  in  the  town  where  licenses  were  granted,  prevent  the  effectual  oper- 
ation of  the  prohibition  in  the  adjoining  towns  ? 

A.     I  think  it  would. 

Q.  Would  you  be  in  favor  of  submitting  this  question  to  the  votes  of  the 
towns,  and  have  it  made  a  political  question,  or  would  you  have  it  made  a 
uniform  law  throughout  the  State  ? 

A.  I  think  that  such  laws  should  be  made  general  in  their  application.  It 
is  better  for  the  Commonwealth  to  make  laws  that  she  can  execute  if  she  can. 

Q.  Then  you  had  rather  the  Commonwealth  should  make  the  laws  than 
submit  the  question  to  the  action  of  municipalities  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  I  am  a  competent  witness  upon  that  point,  because 
I  am  not  a  political  man. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  spoke  of  liquor  being  carried  by  the  express 
companies  to  the  country  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  A  proposition  is  made  to  let  each  municipality  grant  licenses  or  not,  as 
they  may  decide.  Suppose  that  three-fourths  of  the  towns  concluded  that 
they  would  license,  could  not  those  communities  where  licenses  were  not 
granted,  readily  obtain  liquor  from  other  parts  of  the  State  ? 

A.  I  think  that  you  must  put  your  hand  upon  the  express  companies  that 
bring  liquor  from  the  cities  to  the  country  towns,  before  you  can  help  us  by 
any  law  of  that  character. 


APPENDIX.  507 

Q.  But  suppose  that  licenses  are  granted  here  in  Boston,  and  the  sale  of 
liquor  is  legal,  how  could  you  prevent  express  companies  from  buying  it  ? 

A.  You  could  under  the  present  law,  and  you  must  put  the  law  in  force 
against  the  express  companies,  or  you  cannot  relieve  the  people  of  the 
country. 

Q.  Knowing  what  you  do  of  human  nature,  do  you  not  think  that  there 
would  be  more  difficulty  in  executing  a  license  law,  where  you  give  the 
monopoly  of  sale  to  a  few,  than  in  executing  the  present  law,  where  the  sale 
is  prohibited  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  I  can  judge  about  that.  I  cannot  speak  of  the 
future.  I  can  only  judge  from  what  has  passed.  I  want  it  distinctly  under- 
stood that  I  am  not  for  this  or  that  particular  measure.  I  only  want  that 
done  which  is  best  for  my  fellow-men. 

Adjourned. 


508  APPENDIX. 


FIFTEENTH    DAY. 

FRIDAY,  March  15th,  1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  the  hearing  of  testimony  in 
behalf  of  the  Remonstrants  was  continued. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EEV.  JUSTIN  D.  FULTON. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  preach  in  Tremont  Temple,  do  you  not  ? 

A.    I  am  pastor  of  the  Tremont  Baptist  Church. 

Q.     Is  that  a  free  church  ? 

A.    It  is. 

Q.  Which  is  the  best,  a  prohibitory  law,  or  a  license  law  ?  I  would  like 
your  views  on  this  subject  briefly. 

A.  I  have  been  led  to  favor  a  prohibitory  law  for  several  reasons;  among 
others  for  these.  The  first  one  is,  because  of  the  excellence  of  the  law  itself. 
I  think  that  the  law  is  calculated  to  break  up  this  rum-traffic  :  and  that  is  a 
great  thing  to  do  at  this  time,  because  the  rum-traffic  is  the  foundation  of 
nearly  all  the  moral  evil  that  we  have  to  meet  with  as  ministers  and  as  men. 
I  am  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory  law  now  more  than  ever,  because  I  think  there 
is  a  prospect  of  its  rigid  enforcement.  There  has  been  considerable  said 
about  moral  suasion,  as  though  this  prohibitory  law  favored  moral  suasion ;  but, 
in  my  opinion,  the  prohibitory  law  grew  out  of  moral  suasion ;  it  is  the  fruit 
grown  out  from  this  tree.  We  went  into  the  temperance  movement,  and 
carried  it,  for  a  while,  by  moral  suasion ;  but  we  found  that  there  was  a  class 
of  people  that  we  could  not  reach.  And,  on  account  of  this  class  of  people 
that  could  not  be  influenced  by  any  arguments  that  might  be  brought  to  bear 
upon  them,  we  devised  this  prohibitory  law ;  and  I  believe  that  if  this  pro- 
hibitory law  is  enforced,  we  can  do  more  in  a  moral  way  than  we  should  if 
some  such  law  were  not  enforced.  So  far  as  I  understand  it,  this  view  is  par- 
tially agreed  to  by  many  of  those  who  have -heretofore  testified,  and  they  feel 
that  the  law  ought  to  be  rigidly  enforced,  but  do  not  think  that  moral  efforts 
should  be  interfered  with.  My  idea  is,  that  those  persons  who  are  in  favor  of  a 
license  law  are  either  in  favor  of  drinking  themselves,  or  else  have  somebody 
near  them  who  do  drink  ;  and  that  those  individuals  who  are  in  favor  of  the 
morals  of  a  prohibitory  are  nearly  universally  themselves  temperate.  And 
thirdly,  it  has  seemed  to  me  that  moral  suasion  will  be  helped  by  a  law  of  pro- 
hibition. The  objection  here  made  is  that  we  talk  about  the  enforcement 
of  the  prohibitory,  but  do  not  talk  about  saving  men  from  intemperance.  I 
do  not  think  it  is  true  ;  and  yet  it  is  true  to  some  extent.  There  is  so  much 
said  against  it  that  we  see  a  good  deal  of  division.  I  think  that  the  opera- 
tion of  the  moral  influences  in  this  movement  might  be  compared  to  the  cam- 
paign of  General  Sherman,  while  the  law  acts  the  part  of  Grant  in  holding 
the  enemy  in  check,  and  finally  driving  the  enemy  out  of  his  encampments. 


APPENDIX.  509 

I  might  say  that  I  have  noticed  that  intemperance  is  on  the  decrease  very 
much  among  the  masses  of  the  people,  and  especially  among  my  own  congre- 
gation, which  is  very  large,  and  composed  largely  of  young  men ;  I  notice 
that  intemperance  has  greatly  decreased.  And  I  believe,  before  God,  that 
if  fashionable  men,  public  men,  men  of  influence  and  power  would  set  them- 
selves against  this  evil,  it  could  be  eradicated  from  the  land.  I  notice  that 
many  people  who  drink  in  the  cars,  and  on  the  highway,  are  men  who  are  at 
least  fashionable,  and  women  that  are  fashionable;  and  it  is  becoming 
fashionable  to  oppose  this  law,  and  to  say  that  it  cannot  be  enforced. 

Q.  What  is  the  sentiment  of  the  people  of  your  denomination  as  regards 
favoring  the  present  law  ? 

A.  I  think,  so  far  as  I  know,  there  is  no  exception.  I  do  not  know 
of  an  exception.  All  are  opposed  to  a  license  law. 

Q.  You  are  in  the  habit  of  talking  with  other  persons  among  your 
denomination  upon  this  subject  V 

A.  I  have  talked  with  a  large  number,  and  especially  with  our  city 
pastors ;  and  all  are  in  favor  of  the  most  rigid  law  that  can  be  enforced. 

Q.  There  was  some  testimony  here  by  Rev.  Dr.  Neale.  What  do  you 
understand  his  view  to  be  ? 

A.  I  think  Dr.  Neale  tried  to  testify  very  decidedly  against  a  license  law. 
He  told  me  he  did.  He  is  decidedly  opposed  to  a  license  law.  He  is  in  favor 
of  a  prohibitory  law,  if  it  can  be  enforced ;  but  he  does  not  think  this  has  been 
enforced. 

Q.  You  know  of  no  one  denomination  that  has  the  reputation  of  being  in 
favor  of  a  license  law  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  of  one. 

Q.     What  is  the  sentiment  of  the  people  generally  ? 

A .  I  think  if  there  are  any  wine-drinkers  among  them,  they  are  in  favor 
of  a  license  law. 

Q.     How  is  it  with  your  own  congregation  ? 

A.  They  are  all  anti-license.  We  had  a  very  good  test  of  their  opinion 
on  that  subject.  We  got  seventeen  hundred  signatures,  in  about  twenty 
minutes,  in  our  congregation,  in  favor  of  the  present  law. 

Q.  Is  it  not  true  that  there  is  a  great  deal  of  moral  effort  among  the 
people  ? 

-  A.  There  never  was  so  much,  I  guess.  Our  last  temperance  convention 
was  mostly  about  that.  Wherever  I  have  gone  they  tell  me  that  there  never 
were  so  many  abandoning  their  cups  as  at  the  present  time.  I  believe  there 
never  was  so  active  an  interest  as  at  the  present  hour. 

Q.  Is  there  not  an  increased  interest  among  the  Sons  of  Temperance  and 
other  organizations  which  are  active  in  this  cause  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     And  do  they  sign  a  pledge  in  these  organizations  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  they  not  only  sign  the  pledge,  but  become  active  in  the 
cause. 

Q.    Do  you  know  whether  these  orders  are  generally  prohibitionists  ? 

A-  I  am  not  so  well  posted  in  this  as  some  other  gentlemen,  because  I  am 
not  in  the  way  of  seeing  these  reports.  Mr.  Hodges,  and  also  Mr.  Thompson, 


510  APPENDIX. 

who  are  connected  with  the  orders  in  this  State,  tell  me  that  these  orders  are 
decidedly  in  favor  of  prohibition.  So  far  as  I  know  in  the  city,  they  are  ; 
and  I  am  a  member  of  two  or  three  of  them. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Do  you  think  the  prohibitory  law  has  been  enforced 
for  the  last  fifteen  years  ? 

A.     1  know  it  has  not. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     In  Boston,  you  mean  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Do  you  think  the  cause  of  temperance  has 
retrograded  or  advanced,  from  1850  to  the  present  time  ? 

A.  I  think  the  war  has  produced  its  natural  effect.  I  think  there  was 
more  intemperance  then.  I  think  there  is  more  temperance  now  than  either 
before  or  during  the  war. 

Q'  You  think  that  in  1855,  '6,  '7,  '8,  '9  and  'CO  there  was  more  temper- 
ance than  at  any  previous  period  in  the  history  of  the  temperance  movement? 

A .     No,  sir ;  I  do  not. 

Q.  Then  it  was  true,  was  it,  that  after  the  passage  of  this  prohibitory  law 
the  cause  of  temperance  retrograded  ?  And  was  it  true,  as  a  matter  of  fact, 
that  from  1852  to  1860  the  cause  of  temperance  went  backward  from  what  it 
was  in  the  earlier  and  more  active  efforts  upon  this  subject  ? 

A.  I  was  not  living  in  Massachusetts  then  ;  I  have  lived  here  only  three 
years. 

Q.  Are  you  enabled  to  make  any  comparison,  so  far  as  Massachusetts  is 
concerned,  as  to  whether  the  cause  of  temperance  improved  or  diminished  ? 

A.  I  am  able  to  make  a  definite  comparison  between  this  year  and  four 
years  ago.  Of  course,  previous  to  that  I  could  not  give  any  personal  opinion 
as  to  the  relative  condition. 

Q.  What  reason  should  you  give  for  thinking  that  the  cause  had  more 
advanced  now,  if  you  do  not  know  anything  about  it  ? 

A.    I  state  it  because  I  do  know  something  about  it. 

Q.  Does  not  your  first  statement  relate  to  a  period  prior  to  three  years 
ago? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  I  will  inquire  in  regard  to  the  means  of  information  which  you  have,  as 
to  the  actual  state  of  intemperance  throughout  this  Commonwealth  at  the 
present  time.  What  are  your  means  of  information  ? 

A.  I  have  got  observation;  I  have  got  a  very  general  acquaintance;  I 
have  lectured  a  good  deal  upon  the  subject  of  temperance  in  different  parts 
of  the  State ;  and  I  have  got  the  usual  information  within  the  reach  of  every 
intelligent  man. 

Q.  You  infer,  then,  that  there  are  a  less  number  of  cases  of  intoxication 
and  drunkenness  than  heretofore  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir  ;  I  know  there  are  in  this  town. 

Q.     How  do  you  know  that  ? 

A .     I  know  it  by  what  I  hear  from  the  reports. 

Q.     What  reports  ? 

A.    I  know  it  by  the  reports  of  the  police  department. 

Q.    What  are  the  reports  of  the  police  department  that  you  know  it  by  ? 


APPENDIX.  511 

A.    The  reports  of  the  Chief  of  Police,  -which  he  sends  to  me  annually. 

Q,  Does  the  police  report  state  a  less  number  of  cases  of  drunkenness  this 
year  than  the  year  before  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  that  it  makes  any  such  statement. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  the  fact  that  the  report  of  last  year,  up  to  January, 
1866,  states  a  greater  number  of  cases  of  drunkenness  than  in  1865. 

A.    1  have  not  had  the  report  of  1866. 

Q.  I  would  inquire  of  you,  if  you  can  tell  whether  the  number  of  cases  of 
drunkenness  in  1865,  according  to  the  police  report,  was  greater  or  less  than 
in  1864  ? 

A.    The  number  of  cases  of  arrests,  I  think,  was  less. 

Q.  The  number  of  cases  of  drunkenness  which  they  report  (riot  the 
arrests)  were  they  less  in  1865  than  in  1864  ? 

A.    My  impression  is  that  they  are  less. 

Q.  If  you  are  mistaken  as  to  the  matter  of  fact,  is  the  opinion  which  you 
have  formed,  of  any  value  ? 

A.     So  far  as  the  reports  of  the  police  go,  I  suppose  they  are  correct. 

Q.    Is  your  own  judgment  better  than  the  actual  reports  of  the  police  ? 

A.  I  do  not  wish,  by  any  means,  to  say  anything  that  would  do  disrespect 
to  anybody ;  but  I  have  an  impression,  whether  it  is  well  grounded  or  not, 
that  you  have  got  to  read  the  whole  report,  and  take  the  general  bearings  of 
it,  and  not  just  the  mere  statements  of  the  number  of  arrests  ;  as,  for  instance, 
if  I  saw  that  a  large  number  of  liquor  establishments,  where  a  great  deal  of 
liquor  had  been  sold,  had  been  closed,  and  if  the  outward  exhibitions  of 
drunkenness  were  less,  I  should  claim,  whether  these  reports,  or  any  other 
reports  said  it  was  not,  that  the  amount  of  drunkenness  was  less. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  get  your  means  of  observation  from  the  general 
bearing  and  the  whole  scope  of  the  reports.  What  better  means  have  you  of 
ascertaining  the  progress  or  increase  of  intemperance,  than  by  the  number  of 
known  cases  of  drunkenness,  of  which  everybody  knows  that  the  police  reports 
do  not  show  more  than  one  half?  What  better  means  have  you  than  that  ? 

A.    Well,  I  do  not  know  what  bearing  that  has  upon  it  ? 

Q.  I  ask  you  if  you  have  got  better  means  of  inferring  as  to  the  increase 
or  decrease  of  intemperance,  than  you  get  from  the  number  of  cases  of  intem- 
perate persons  that  come  within  the  control  of  the  police  ? 

A.     I  should  think  so,  certainly. 

Q.  Now,  if  these  arrests  were  greater  in  1865  than  they  were  in  1864, 
what  means  have  you  got  to  show,  or  to  base  your  opinion  upon,  that  intem- 
perance has  diminished  ? 

A.  I  take  this  ground:  that,  out  of  nineteen  hundred  and  fifty  liquor- 
shops,  as  I  read  in  the  report  of  the  Chief  of  Constabulary,  one  thousand 
have  been  closed.  I  judge  from  that  that  there  is  a  great  deal  less  liquor  sold 
than  there  was.  I  know  that,  when  I  came  to  Boston,  there  were  five  shops 
between  my  house  and  Tremont  Temple.  I  know  it  is  not  so  now.  I  used  to 
see  men  drunk  on  the  Sabbath.  I  have  not  seen  a  man  drunk  this  week  ; 
and  I  do  not  believe  there  have  been  many  drunkards  on  the  Sabbath,  lately, 
as  compared  with  the  number  formerly. 


512  APPENDIX. 

Q.  That  is  a  question  we  shall  come  to  hereafter.  I  want  to  get  at  the 
basis  of  your  opinion.  You  say  you  rely  more  upon  the  fact  that  the  State 
Constabulary  report  a  thousand  liquor-shops ,  closed  than  you  do  upon  the 
actual  cases  of  intemperance  reported  by  the  police  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    You  think  that  is  more  reliable  evidence,  do  you  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.  Suppose  that  there  are  a  thousand  liquor-shops  shut  up,  and  yet  that 
there  is  an  increase  of  drinking  and  in  the  amount  of  drunkenness,  will  the 
closing  of  the  liquor-shops  be  any  evidence  ? 

A.    I  should  not  suppose  it. 

Q.  If  it  were  the  fact,  you  would  infer  that  the  closing  of  the  liquor-shops 
had  not  diminished  that  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  for  instance,  I  have  a  report  taken  from  a  morning  paper  of 
four  weeks  ago,  I  think,  that  for  the  first  time  for  many  years  there  were 
only  eight  arrests,  I  think  (I  did  not  bring  the  number  with  me),  on  Saturday, 
and  not  one  arrest  in  the  twenty-four  hours  just  following.  I  know  that  when  I 
came  here  three  years  ago,  the  number  of  arrests  was  greater ;  and  the  want 
was  patent  to  everybody  that  there  should  be  a  power  to  shut  up  these  places. 

Q.  By  what  means  do  you  assert  positively  ?  Have  you  means  of  knowing 
the  extent  of  drinking  usages  in  Boston  ? 

A.  1  have  a  very  large  congregation,  and  I  hare  two  missionaries  to  assist 
me,  and  have  conversed  with  other  clergymen. 

Q.  Do  you  think,  yourself,  that  in  a  congregation  of  two  thousand  out  of  a 
population  of  a  hundred  and  ninety  thousand,  you  would  have  information 
with  positivcness  as  regards  the  general  habits  of  temperance  or  intemperance  ? 

A.    I  could  do  it  if  I  had  no  congregation. 

Q.  Do  you  see  a  tenth  or  a  hundredth  part  of  the  drunkenness  in  the 
city? 

A.     I  cannot  say  as  to  that.     I  know  that  if  it  was  so,  I  should  see  it. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  there  cannot  be  a  thousand  cases  of  drunken- 
ness in  a  week  and  you  not  see  them  ? 

A.    I  presume  there  may  be. 

Q.  Then  how  can  you  say,  from  your  own  observation,  that  you  know 
there  is  less  drunkenness  now  than  at  a  certain  time,  when  you  say  that  you 
do  not  know  anything  about  a  thousand  cases  that  may  happen  during  the 
week? 

A.    I  do  not  say  that  I  do  not  know  of  them. 

Q.  Do  you  now  say  that  you  do  know  of  all  the  cases  of  drunkenness  in 
Boston. 

A.    No,  sir;  I  do  not. 

Q.  Now,  how  can  you  say  that,  from  your  observation,  there  is  less  drunk- 
enness now  than  at  that  time,  when  you  admit  that  there  might  be  a  thousand 
cases  of  drunkenness  that  you  do  not  know  anything  about  ? 

A.  I  should  have  to  suppose  that  there  were  four  or  five  thousand  cases 
several  years  ago  that  I  did  not  know  anything  about. 

Q.  You  know  nothing  about  the  old'  temperance  movement  as  spoken  of 
here? 


APPENDIX.  513 

A.    Nothing,  except  what  I  have  heard. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  associations  in  aid  of  the  cause  of  temperance.  Are 
these  extended  throughout  the  Commonwealth  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Are  they  secret  societies  ? 

A.     They  are,  to  some  extent. 

Q.     Have  you  secret  pass-words  ? 

A.     I  rather  think  there  are. 

Q.     Do  you  know  ? 

A.    If  there  are  I  never  remember  them  over  night,  but  I  always  get  in. 

Q.     Do  you  know  that  there  are  pass-words  used  ? 

A .     No,  I  really  do  not  know  much  about  it. 

Q.     Do  you  not  know  now  that  they  have  secret  pass-words  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  if  I  should  answer  this  question,  I  should  have  to  know 
a  pass-word. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  rule  in  these  organizations  that  there  is  to  be  a  secret  pass- 
word, that  those  initiated  have  to  give  when  entering  one  of  these  meetings  ? 

A.     I  should  have  to  say  that  I  presume  it  is  true. 

Q.  I  would  inquire  of  you  if  you  have  a  great  moral  cause  ?  You  so 
regard  the  cause  of  temperance,  do  you  not  ? 

A.     I  do,  undoubtedly,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  think  a  great  moral  cause  is  to  be  promoted  by  secret 
associations  ? 

A.  Yes  ;  I  have  an  idea  that  we  ought  to  have  some  sort  of  an  association 
to  come  in  contact  with  this  liquor  association  which  has  been  formed. 

Q.  I  wish  to  know  if  you  think  a  moral  cause  like  the  cause  of  temperance, 
enjoined  by  the  bible,  can  be  well  promoted  by  secret  organizations  scattered 
all  over  the  Commonwealth  ? 

A.  1  wish  to  state  that  I  did  not  state  that  this  moral  work  was  carried  on 
entirely  by  them.  The  question  was  asked,  if  I  knew  anything  about  these 
associations,  and  if  they  were  engaged  in  the  moral  work. 

Q.    You  say  you  are  a  member  of  three  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  say  that  you  do  not  know  anything  about  them  ? 

A .     No,  sir ;  I  should  say  that  I  did  know  something  about  them. 

Q.  Are  the  members  of  these  associations  pledged  not  to  reveal  what  is 
there  done  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  whether  they  are  or  not. 

Q.     Did  you  go  through  any  form  of  taking  an  obligation  not  to  reveal  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  I  did. 

Q.     Do  you  not  know  ? 

A.  I  should  have  to  ask  somebody ;  I  do  not  know  that  I  did.  I  went  in 
simply  to  save  a  man,  into  each  of  these  societies. 

Q.    You  say  you  cannot  tell  whether  you  took  an  obligation  not  to  reveal  ? 

A .     No  ;  I  do  not  think  I  did. 

Q.     Do  you  think  you  did  know  ? 

A.     I  said  once  that  I  thought  I  did  not. 
65 


514  APPENDIX. 

Q.  I  have  here  a  copy  of  a  sermon  purporting  to  have  been  preached  by 
you  in  Tremont  Temple,  February  10,  1867,  in  which  you  say : — "  But 
respectable  men  do  not  want  a  commissioner  from  such  a  power  to  act  for 
them,  so  they  hire  a  man  to  stand  six  days  in  the  Exchange  to  ask  men  to 
sign  their  petition  for  a  license  ;  so  that  the  Boston  Journal  may  announce  the 
pleasing  intelligence  that  Alpheus  Hardy  and  other  '  solid '  men  of  Boston 
have  asked  for  a  license,  when  it  is  known,  and  is  now  notorious,  that  the  same 
Alpheus  Hardy  rents  one  of  the  leading  bar-rooms  of  Boston,  where  young 
men  in  droves  are  thronging  this  broad  road  to  death."  Do  you  regard  that, 
if  that  be  true,  as  disreputable  for  any  man  to  do  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  know,  when,  you  made  that  statement,  that  that  statement 
against  Mr.  Hardy  was  true  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  did  you  know  it  ? 

A.     In  various  ways :  one  way  was  by  Mr.  Hardy's  letter. 

Q.  When  was  the  date  of  that  letter,  compared  with  the  time  of  preaching 
that  sermon  ? 

A .     The  date  was  two  days  before,  I  think. 

Q.     Are  you  sure  about  that  ? 

A.     Well,  yes ;  I  think  so. 

Q.  I  want  to  know  if  you  have  any  means  of  knowing  that  that  charge 
was  true  ? 

A.  I  know  this,  that  that  same  Alpheus  Hardy  was  one  of  the  trustees 
of  the  Sears  estate,  and  rented  the  Tremont  House,  owned  by  the  Sears  estate, 
and  that  the  Tremont  House  has  got  a  "  rum-hole  "  in  it,  where  young  men 
are  going  to  ruin. 

Q.     Do  you  know  the  terms  of  that  renting  ? 

A.     No,  sir  ;  I  know  only  by  report. 

Q.  Do  you  rely  on  common  report  as  evidence  in  making  a  charge  of  this 
kind  ? 

A.     Oh,  yes  ;  if  it  is  well  enough  grounded  to  believe  it. 

Q.     Do  you  know  anything  about  the  terms  of  that  renting  ? 

A.     Well,  yes;  I  know  something  about  it. 

Q.     What  were  they  ? 

A.  I  know  there  was  a  little  sort  of  a  subterfuge  in  it  about  a  nuisance, 
or  something  of  that  sort. 

Q.     What  did  you  know  about  a  subterfuge  at  the  time  you  preached  that 


sermon 


A.    I  did  not  say  that  I  knew  there  was  a  subterfuge  at  that  time. 

Q.     How  did  you  know  it  ? 

A.     I  rather  think  I  did  know  it  at  the  time. 

Q.  How  did  you  know  it  ?  Had  this  lease  been  made  a  subject  of  inquiry 
or  seen  by  anybody  but  the  parties  to  it  ? 

A.  A  friend  of  Mr.  Hardy's,  I  think,  told  me  something  of  the  matter, 
having  talked  with  Mr.  Hardy  about  it. 

Q.     Who  is  that  friend  ? 

A.    I  will  tell,  if  I  ought  to  tell. 


APPENDIX.  515 

Q.     Are  you  willing  to  tell  ? 

A.  I  would  be  very  happy  to  tell  after  I  get  the  consent  of  the  gentleman ; 
I  do  not  wish  to  tell  without. 

Q.  You  are  unwilling  to  tell  ?  Are  you  willing  to  state  that  any  man  ever 
told  you  so  ? 

A.     I  think  so. 

Q.    Do  you  know  ? 

A.     Well,  no ;  I  do  not  know. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  proper  for  a  moral  and  Christian  minister  to  make  dis- 
reputable charges  in  his  sermons  against  individuals,  unless  he  absolutely 
knows  the  truth  of  that  charge  ?  I  want  you  to  answer  that  question  as  to 
whether  you  think  it  is  proper. 

A .     I  should  not  think  it  was ;  no. 

Q.    Jf  you  did  not  absolutely  know  the  charge  you  made 

A.    I  did  know  the  charge. 

Q.    You  did? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  knew  that  Mr.  Hardy  rented  that  bar-room  for  the  purpose  of 
selling  liquor,  did  you  ? 

A.     Of  course  the  place  was  rented,  in  which  there  was  rented  a  bar-room. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  knew  that  he  rented  a  bar-room  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  not  understand,  when  you  made  that  charge,  that  that  bar- 
roorti  was  rented  for  the  purpose  of  selling  liquor  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  knew  that  he  rented  the  Tremont  House,  and  rented 
that  bar-room  for  the  purpose  of  selling  liquor,  and  that  you  had  seen  a  letter 
referring  to  this  matter  ? 

A.  It  was  a  copy  of  a  letter  requesting  me  not  to  say  anything  hard  about 
Mr.  Hardy  on  the  Sabbath.  In  this  letter  Mr.  Hardy  defended  himself  in  the 
same  way  as  in  the  other  letter,  saying  that  he  was  one  of  the  trustees,  and 
rented  it  in  that  way. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  knew  it  at  that  time — that  is,  so  far  as  that 
letter  went  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.     Why,  then,  did  you  not  make  the  qualification  ? 

A.     I  did  not  care  how  he  rented  it. 

Q.     Was  there  anything  said  in  that  letter  as  to  the  terms  of  the  renting  ? 

A.  J  do  not  know  that  there  was;  I  do  not  remember  much  about  the 
letter. 

Q.  How  did  you  come  to  say,  a  few  moments  ago,  then,  that  the  idea  of 
the  letter  was  that  he  was  one  of  the  trustees,  and  rented  the  house  in  that 
way  ?  Do  you  now  say  that  there  was  a  subterfuge  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  do  not  say  that  I  knew  of  the  subterfuge  on  Sunday. 

Q.  At  the  time,  then,  that  you  preached  that  sermon,  you  did  not  know 
anything  about  the  lease  ?  You  did  not  then  know  anything  about  that 
subterfuge  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  whether  I  did  or  not ;  but  I  think  I  did. 


516  APPENDIX. 

Q.  I  would  ask  you,  then,  if,  not  knowing  anything  about  the  lease,  nor  of 
the  contract,  nor  whether  it  was  leased  to  exclude  the  sale  of  liquor  or  not, 
you  regard  it  as  proper  to  make  a  charge  of  that  kind  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  it  is  a  proper  supposition.  I  did  know  more  than  he 
supposed  I  did.  I  knew  that  he  rented  the  Tremont  House.  I  did  not  care 
anything  about  the  terms,  but  simply  the  fact  that  it  was  rented  by  him. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  That  is,  you  think  that  the  mere  renting  of  it  is 
a  fair  ground  for  the  assertion,  independent  of  the  terms  ? 

A.  The  fact  that  the  Tremont  House  is  rented,  and  that  there  is  a  public 
bar-room  rented  there,  is  sufficient  ground  for  me. 

Q.    Independent  of  terms  ? 

A.     Independent  of  terms. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  mean  that  the  putting  them  in  was  the 
design  of  Mr.  Hardy  ? 

A.    I  do  not  say  that. 

Q.     Do  you  say  that  it  is  a  subterfuge  there  ? 

A.  I  stated  that  there  was  some  sort  of  a  subterfuge.  I  do  not  know 
whether  he  intended  to  put  it  in  there  or  not  ? 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  think  that  the  great  obstacle  to  the  cause  of 
temperance  is  the  drinking  usages  of  a  certain  class  in  society  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  want  to  ask  you  another  thing.  You  denounce  very  strongly.  Do 
you  believe  that  the  free  use  of  liquors  is  a  sin  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Per  se  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  the  free  use  of  intoxicating  liquors,  those  which 
are  embraced  among  intoxicating  liquors  and  are  declared  to  be  intoxicating 
by  the  law  of  Massachusetts,  is  a  sin  per  se  ? 

A.     To  be  used  as  a  beverage  ?    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  What  do  you  mean  by  beverage,  the  occasional 
taking  of  it,  or  the  usual  and  constant  use  of  it  ? 

A.    I  take  either. 

Q.  Then  a  single  glass  of  wine,  or  cider,  or  anything  prohibited  by  the 
law,  you  would  consider  a  sin  ? 

A.    I  would. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  it  is  wrong,  and  a  sin  per  se,  to  drink  a  glass  of 
cider,  under  any  circumstances,  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  whether  I  do  or  not.  I  have  never  really  got  down  to 
that. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     You  are  in  higher  spheres  ? 

A .     In  higher  spheres ;  yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  believe  that  the  free  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  is  a  sin  ? 

A.  Well,  I  think  in  that  I  should  go  against  some  of  my  friends.  Yes,  sir, 
I  rather  think  it  is. 

Q.     For  any  purpose  ? 

A .  Well,  I  know  very  well  that  there  are  those  who  think  differently.  I 
do  not  myself  think  it  is  necessary  for  anything. 


APPENDIX.  517 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  the  Saviour  of  the  world,  by  his  omniscience, 
knew  everything  that  would  happen  to  the  end  of  time,  and  in  all  states  and 
conditions  ? 

A.    I  do  most  a&suredly. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that,  knowing  what  would  be  the  state  of  society,  the 
temptations  and  everything  to  which  mankind  would  be  exposed,  that  Christ 
would  have  instituted  wine  as  a  memorial — that  he  would  have  instituted  an 
article,  to  be  kept  before  the  community  all  the  time,  which  ought  to  be 
outlawed  ? 

A.  I  think  that  if  we  go  into  that  question,  we  should  have  to  go  back 
and  see  what  he  did  institute. 

Q.     I  refer  to  wine. 

A.  The  wine  used  at  the  Passover  was  not  fermented  liquor;  it  was  simply 
pressed  from  the  grape. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  Do  you  not  think  that  the  wine  spoken  of  in  the 
New  Testament  was  the  same  wine  as  that  used  at  the  feast  of  the  Passover  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  there  any  difference  in  the  words  used  to  designate  the  article  of 
wine? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Will  you  tell  us  what  it  was  ? 

A.  I  do  not  believe  I  could.  If  I  had  supposed  that  I  was  going  into  that 
I  would  have  brought  the  words  here.  I  know  the  argument  very  well ;  and 
I  do  not  believe  that  it  is  at  all  such  wine  as  we  have. 

Q.  When  it  speaks  of  a  man  who  uses  wine  excessively  as  being  a 
gluttonous  man  and  a  wine-bibber,  is  it  not  the  same  word  used  ? 

A.     My  impression  is  that  it  is  not  ? 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  What  do  you  understand  to  be  the  kind  of  wine 
alluded  to  when  we  are  told  to  give  wine  to  those  that  are  faint,  and  strong 
drink  to  those  who  are  ready  to  perish  ?  What  kind  of  wine  was  that  ? 

A.     The  strong  drink  probably  was  not  the  same. 

Q.  Then,  do  I  understand  you  to  believe  that  there  is  any  hope  of  pro- 
moting the  temperance  reform,  by  taking  ground  that  is  contrary  to  the 
conviction  and  feelings  of  a  large  portion  of  the  Christian  church  of  all 
denominations  ? 

A.     I  know  there  is. 

Q.     This  is  the  only  way  to  carry  it  ? 

A.     I  think  so. 

Q.  Then  in  regard  to  the  use  of  wine  at  the  sacrament,  you  would  go 
against  it  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  mean  the  same  kind  of  wine  that  you  mean.  And  I  think 
that  the  most  respectable  part  of  the  people  think  about  as  I  do  about  this 
one  question.  • 

Q.     Do  they  practice  that  opinion  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  they  find  it  very  difficult  to  get  other  wine,  and  they  let  it  go ; 
but  I  think  they  feel  the  other  way. 


518  APPENDIX. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  J.  M.  MANNING. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  have  been  a  resident  of  Boston  for  how  many 
years  ? 

A.  It  is  now  ten  years  this  present  week  since  I  became  a  resident  of 
Boston. 

Q.     You  are  the  associate  pastor  of  the  Old  South  Church  ? 

A.     I  preach  at  the  Old  South  Church. 

Q.     And  alternate  with  the  senior  pastor  in  the  Chambers  Street  Chapel  ? 

A.  He  preaches  in  the  same  church.  There  is  also  another  pastor  who 
preaches  in  the  same  church  with  me. 

Q.     Have  you  given  special  attention  to  the  question  of  temperance  ? 

A.     I  have  not  made  it  a  speciality. 

Q.     Has  it  or  has  it  not  enlisted  your  interest  ? 

A.     It  has. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  have  you  been  an  observer  of  the  facts  connected 
with  the  temperance  reform  ? 

A.     The  subject  has  grown  up  in  connection  with  my  ministry. 

Q.  Have  you  felt  yourself  able  to  eliminate  from  the  Christian  work  all 
temperance  effort? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  State,  in  your  own  way,  your  opinions  in  regard  to  the  condition  of  the 
cause,  and  particularly  with  regard  to  the  question  here  at  issue  concerning 
the  policy  of  prohibition  ? 

A.  I  have  not  seen  a  draft  of  the  petition  for  a  license  law.  I  read  in 
the  papers  (but  do  not  know  of  my  own  knowledge  whether  it  is  true  or  not,) 
that  the  petitioners  for  the  license  law  have  denned  their  position  more 
recently  and  are  not  petitioning  for  what  it  was  supposed  that  they  were 
petitioning  for.  So  that  I  cannot  say  how  much  I  should  be  opposed  to  the 
petition  until  I  had  read  it.  I  suppose,  however,  that  the  petitioners  ask  at 
least  for  this,  that  persons  may  be  licensed  to  deal  in  intoxicating  drinks  as  a 
private  business  and  for  the  purpose  of  making  money. 

Q.  They  ask  that  hotel-keepers  and  victuallers  and  some  others,  may  have 
license  to  sell  as  a  beverage,  and  that  all  restrictions  upon  the  sale  of  beer, 
cider  and  wine  may  be  removed,  and  that  all  restrictions  over  the  licensed 
dealer  may  be  removed. 

A.  I  should  not  be  in  favor  of  granting  that  petition,  but  I  may  say  here, 
that  supposing  those  objects  at  least  to  be  contemplated  in  the  petition,  I 
signed  a  remonstrance  with  other  ministers  of  this  city  and  vicinity  against 
the  granting  of  the  petition,  and  in  signing  that  remonstrance  I  did  not  think 
I  was  actuated  by  any  vindictive  spirit,  nor  by  any  desire  to  interfere  with  any 
man's  honorable  private  business.  I  think  that  I  have  as  much  desire  for  the 
material  prosperity  of  the  City  of  Boston,  in  all  respects,  as  any  other  man. 
I  claim  at  least  to  be  second  to  none  in  what  is  usually  called  "  public  spirit," 
and  furthermore,  I  have  no  vindictive  feeling  towards  those  who  are  at  present 
engaged  in  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors.  I  can  understand,  I  think,  very 
well,  how  many  hotel-keepers,  who  mean  to  do  an  honorable  business,  have 
been  gradually  drawn  into  this  sale,  but  I  suspect  that  they,  themselves,  would 
be  glad  if  they  could  keep  hotels  and  make  it  a  paying  business  —  if  they 


APPENDIX.  519 

could  meet,  what  seems  to  them  to  be,  the  wants  of  their  customers — I  suspect 
that  they,  themselves,  would  enjoy  more  peace  of  mind  if  they  could  get  along 
without  selling  intoxicating  liquors.  I  am  not  one  of  those  who  never  go  to 
the  Parker  House  or  Young's  Hotel  for  a  dinner.  I  have  often  dined  there  and 
am  generally  well  served,  although  I  think  that  I  have  noticed  that  some  per- 
son near  me,  who  had  ordered  his  wine,  received  a  little  more  prompt  attend- 
*nce  than  I  did  ;  but  still  I  did  not  allow  that  to  prejudice  me  at  all  against 
the  hotel-keeper.  I  have  no  doubt  those  keepers  of  hotels  when  they  take 
the  money  out  of  their  drawers  at  night,  would  feel  better  in  counting  that 
money,  if  they  could  look  at  it  and  feel  the  assurance  that  no  noble  woman 
and  no  dependent  children  had  been  made  to  suffer  from  the  outrages  of  a 
drunken  father  and  husband,  on  account  of  that  which  they  gave  in  exchange 
for  the  money.  I  think  if  they  could  do  that,  they  would  go  to  bed  Saturday 
night  and  sleep  more  soundly.  It  seems  to  me  that  if  the  keepers  of  our 
public  houses  could  once  understand  that  this  is  the  sentiment  of  the  people 
of  the  Commonwealth,  and  if  the  temperance  people  would  nobly  sustain  them 
in  their  efforts  to  keep  public  houses  without  selling  intoxicating  drinks,  and 
exercise  towards  them,  not  a  spirit  of  vindictiveness,  but  a  manly  spirit  of  love 
and  good-will,  that  much  might  be  done  in  that  way  to  counteract  the  opposition 
of  the  liquor-dealers  to  what  is  called  the  prohibitory  law.  I  believe  the 
statute  does  not  call  it  by  that  name,  for  it  does  not,  as  I  understand,  abso- 
lutely prohibit  the  use  of  intoxicating  drinks.  I  am  opposed  to  licensing 
private  dealers — common  dealers — because  it  seems  to  me  that  it  is  subjecting 
those  dealers  to  a  most  powerful  temptation.  I  do  not  believe  that  it  is  a  sin 
per  se,  to  drink  a  glass  of  wine.  I  believe  that  an  invalid  may  drink  when  a  wise 
physician  prescribes  it,  and  therefore  it  is  not  a  sin  under  all  circumstances  to 
sell  it ;  but  the  common  dealer  is  exposed  to  a  very  powerful  temptation.  I 
presume  there  are  men  in  Massachusetts  who  could  be  trusted  to  sell  intoxica- 
ting drinks,  when  they  know  that  all  the  profits  of  their  business  depend  upon 
the  amount  of  their  sales ;  but  such  men  are  few.  The  temptation  is  a 
strong  one.  I  suspect  that  those  men  who  would  be  trustworthy  in  such  a 
business,  are  not  the  men  who  would  ask  for  licenses.  I  should  not  like  to  see 
a  friend  of  mine,  no  matter  how  strong  in  moral  principle,  or  how  firmly 
guarded  by  his  love  for  justice  and  for  his  fellow-men  he  might  be, — I  should 
\iot  like  to  see  him  exposed  to  such  temptation.  I  believe  that  under  such 
circumstances  and  by  such  a  person,  the  selling  of  intoxicating  liquor  would 
be  immoral  and  a  sin ;  but  inasmuch  as  we  must  have  liquor  for  medicinal, 
mechanical  and  chemical  purposes,  it  seems  to  me  that  the  Commonwealth, 
itself,  should  be  the  liquor-seller, — that  that  power  which  represents  the  tax- 
payers who  have  to  bear  the  burden  of  all  the  crime  and  pauperism 
which  result  from  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors,  should  be  the  seller.  And, 
as  I  think  it  will  be  a  proud  day  for  Massachusetts  when  we  can  say,  that  in 
the  State  of  Massachusetts  there  is  but  one  liquor-seller,  and  that  liquor-seller 
is  the  Governor  of  the  Commonwealth ;  that  it  is  a  dangerous  business,  a  per- 
ilous business,  and  we  intrust  only  our  highest  civil  functionary  with  it.  The 
question  as  to  whether  the  prohibitory  liquor  law  has  proved  a  failure  or  not, 
I  am  not,  perhaps,  sufficiently  conversant  with  the  facts  to  answer,  but  it 
seems  to  me,  from  what  I  have  already  said,  that  the  present  law,  if  we  have 


520  APPENDIX. 

the  proper  officers  to  execute  it,  is  adapted  to  accomplish  the  object  for  which 
it  was  enacted.  The  amount  of  intemperance  in  this  city  and  in  various 
other  places,  may  have  increased  since  the  prohibitory  liquor  law,  as  it  is 
called,  was  passed,  but  I  do  not  infer  from  that  that  the  liquor  law  itself  has 
been  the  occasion  of  that  increase.  There  may  have  been  an  absolute  increase 
and  not  a  relative  increase;  that  is,  the  population  has  increased,  and  it  is  my 
impression,  from  conversation  with  various  gentlemen,  not  so  much  from  per- 
sonal acquaintance  with  the  individual  facts  and  cases,  that  there  would  be 
more  intemperance  to-day  were  it  not  for  the  influence  of  the  prohibitory  law. 
I  think  we  can  account  for  the  increase  of  intemperance  upon  other  grounds. 
The  mind  of  the  United  States  has  been  overstrained  during  the  last  four 
years.  From  this  great  excitement  there  is  naturally  a  reaction,  and  the 
people  are  more  strongly  tempted  to  indulge  in  stimulants  than  formerly. 
Then,  again,  the  apparent  increase  of  Avealth  through  the  inflation  of  the 
currency  of  the  country,  has  produced  an  unhealthy  state  of  feeling  in  the 
community,  which  is  a  natural  excitement  to  the  use  of  stimulants.  It  does 
not  seem  to  me  that  the  prohibitory  law  has  made  those  who  believe  in  moral 
suasion  (and  I  believe  most  firmly  in  it)  less  faithful.  I  believe  that  before 
the  prohibitory  law  was  passed,  some  of  the  congregations  used  to  complain 
because  the  ministers  used  moral  suasion.  Now  that  we  have  this  law,  the 
complaint  is  that  they  are  depending  upon  the  law  and  have  ceased  moral 
suasion.  I  trust  that  we  who  are  the  ministers,  will  learn  the  lesson  which 
this  charge  contains,  and  if  we  have  been  remiss,  that  we  will  be  more  faithful 
hereafter  in  urging  the  duty  of  temperance  upon  our  congregations. 

'  Q.  Have  you  not  found  pretty  much  the  same  class  of  persons  all  along 
through  the  history  of  the  temperance  movement,  objecting  to  whatever 
measure  was  then  in  vogue  ? 

A.  I  should  say,  yes,  sir.  I  have  found  that  to  be  true  during  my  minis- 
try. The  prohibitory  law  had  been  enacted  when  I  became  a  resident  of  this 
city,  although  in  my  boyhood  and  childhood  I  knew  somewhat  of  the  license 
law,  but  the  present  law  was  on  the  statute  books  when  I  came  to  the  city, 
and  being  naturally  a  conservative  man,  I  was  in  favor  of  upholding  the 
present  state  of  things. 

Q.  You  alluded  to  the  hypothetical  increase  of  intemperance.  .  Do  you 
think  that,  judging  from  your  own  observation,  you  are  warranted  in  saying 
that  intemperance  has  increased  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  My  observation  would  be  insufficient  to  warrant  me  in 
making  such  a  statement. 

Q.  So  far  as  you  can  compare  the  present  with  ten  years  ago,  would  you 
say  that  you  observe  more  or  less  inebriety  ? 

A.  I  think  I  can  say  confidently  that  I  observe  less.  There  is  less  public 
drunkenness,  less  visible  drunkenness,  than  there  was  ten  years  ago. 

Q.  So  far  as  the  social  circles  in  which  you  move  are  concerned,  do  you 
feel  that  there  is  there  any  increase  in  the  moderate  use  of  liquor  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  am  very  happy  to  say  that  in  the  circles  in  which  I  move  I 
think  the  tendency  has  been  the  opposite,  owing,  I  suppose,  to  the  public  sen- 
timent created  in  those  circles  ;  and  I  attribute  that  public  sentiment  in  part, 
to  the  influence  of  this  law. 


APPENDIX.  521 

Q.  Have  you  observed  any  detriment  in  or  from  the  law  to  the  use  of 
moral  efforts — is  there  anything  in  the  existing  law  that  will  debar  moral 
effort  ? 

A.  There  is  nothing  in  it  that  bars  moral  effort.  I  do  not  suppose  that 
any  law  prohibiting  any  act  ought  to  make  us  less  faithful  in  our  efforts  to 
produce  a  public  sentiment  which  will  prevent  the  act  itself,  if  the  act  be  in 
our  judgment  wrong  and  contrary  to  the  spirit  of  Christianity.  For  instance, 
we  do  not  make  the  law  against  theft  an  excuse  for  not  teaching  our  children 
that  they  should  not  steal. 

Q.  What  class  of  temperance  men  have  been  most  active  in  the  use  of 
moral  means,  those  who  uphold  the  prohibitory  law  or  those  who  oppose  it  ? 

A.  I  think  that  some  of  those  gentlemen  whose,  names  appear  as  petition- 
ers or  as  witnesses  in  favor  of  this  license  law,  I  think  that  some  of  those  gentle- 
men mean  to  be  just  as  true  temperance  men  as  I  mean  to  be ;  and  I  think 
that  some  of  them  have  been  faithful  in  using  moral  means  for  the  suppression 
of  intemperance.  I  am  not  able  to  answer  your  question  definitely,  but  I 
can  give  only  my  general  impression.  I  go  about  the  Commonwealth  some- 
what. I  have  met  many  different  public  audiences  during  the  past  six 
months  and  have  conversed  with  many  gentlemen,  and  it  is  my  experience 
that  those  who  are  most  active  in  promoting  temperance  are  opposed  to  the 
enactment  of  a  license  law. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  possible  for  men  who  are  known  to  be  habitual  users 
of  intoxicating  beverages  in  any  form,  to  exert  in  favor  of  total  abstinence 
that  degree  of  influence  that  a  total  abstainer  can  ? 

A.  I  think  the  old  adage,  that  our  actions  preach  louder  than  our  words, 
holds  true  here. 

Q.  Would  you  feel  if  you  had  a  class  of  young  persons  under  your 
immediate  personal  influence,  at  liberty  to  use  any  alcoholic  beverages,  and 
thus  place  such  an  example  before  them  ? 

A.     Certainly  not  while  I  professed  to  be  a  follower  of  Christ. 

Q.  Do  you  feel  clear  in  the  position  that  such  an  example  is  wrong  and 
sinful,  although  the  acceptance  of  a  glass  of  wine  under  other  circumstances 
might  not  be  sinful  ? 

A .  I  suppose  that  there  are  very  few  external  acts  that  are  sins  in  them- 
selves. The  sin  depends  upon  the  motive.  If  a  man  drinks  liquor  to  save 
his  life,  or  if  I  should  find  a  man  at  the  point  of  death  and  put  the  bottle  to 
his  lips,  I  do  not  suppose  that  the  act  would  be  a  sin. 

Q.  So  that  it  is  out  of  the  social  relations  that  men  bear,  that  the  character 
of  their  conduct  is  made  to  follow  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  believe  that  many  persons  who  use  wine  habitually  at  their 
tables  are  conscientious  Christian  men,  and  I  have  often  argued  this  question 
with  such  persons  in  a  friendly  way,  and  I  always  take  the  ground  which 
seems  to  me  to  be  the  ground  of  the  Scriptures  upon  this  subject.  I  do  not 
wish  to  be  understood  as  saying  that  I  think  that  anybody  who  drinks  a  glass 
of  wine  socially,  commits  a  sin  against  God ;  but  I  think  that  I  should  be 
committing  a  sin  to  do  it. 

Q.    You  would  leave  that  question  to  be  decided  by  the  measure  of  light 
and  conviction  of  the  individual  himself  ? 
6G 


522  APPENDIX. 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.  Would  that  fact,  although  he  excuses  himself,  prevent  his  example  or 
influence  from  being  bad  ? 

A.  Not  at  all.  There  is  an  old  saying  that  a  blunder  is  sometimes  worse 
than  a  crime,  and  a  man  may  by  mistake  or  through  ignorance  do  that  which 
shall  cause  a  great  amount  of  injury. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  Commonwealth,  in  considering  the  expediency 
or  the  duty  devolving  upon  it  in  this  great  social  emergency,  under  any  obli- 
gation to  lower  its  standard  of  principle  to  the  level  of  the  consciences  of  such 
men  as  you  hav.e  referred,  to  ? 

A.  I  should  be  very  sorry  to  see  the  Commonwealth  depart  from  what  I 
consider  to  be  its  present  policy  upon  this  question. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  to  be  the  duty  of  the  State,  to  place  its  standard 
of  effort  and  especially  its  principles  as  embodied  in  law,  upon  a  level 
with  the  best  minds  of  the  State,  or  upon  the  level  of  the  lower  habits  and 
practices  of  the  people  of  the  State  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  law  should  be  an  elevating  power.  I  consider  the  law 
to  be  one  of  the  educators  of  human  society. 

Q.  Do  you  feel  that  there  is  any  considerable  force  in  the  assumption,  that 
if  u  law  is  disobeyed,  it  should  be  repealed  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  when  the  supreme  law  of  our  land  was  violated,  we  sent  our 
army  to  conquer  the  violators.  We  did  not  change  the  law,  because  we  be- 
lieved the  law  to  be  in  principle  what  it  ought  to  be.  So  it  is  in  regard  to 
this  law. 

Q.  Would  you  think  it  the  duty  of  the  civil  authorities  to  repeal  this  law 
because  it  is  disobeyed,  or  should  they  use  their  influence  to  execute  the  law  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  law  can  be  executed  a  great  deal  more  easily 
than  even  its  friends  suppose.  If  the  liquor-dealers  once  find  that  they  can 
keep  good  hotels  without  furnishing  intoxicating  drinks, — that  public  senti- 
ment does  not  demand  it, — we  shall  not  have  so  great  opposition  in  the 
enforcement  of  the  law. 

Q.     Do  you  see  any  indications  that  the  law  is  likely  to  be  better  executed  ? 

A.  My  duties  are  of  such  a  nature,  that  I  do  not  come  in  personal  contact 
with  the  facts.  I  read  all  that  reaches  me  through  the  public  press,  and  I 
converse  with  gentlemen  who  are  interested  in  the  law,  and  my  impression  is, 
that  there  is  an  advance  in  the  direction  of  which  you  speak. 

Q.  What,  so  far  as  you  know,  is  the  general  feeling  of  the  ministers  of 
your  church  in  regard  to  this  law  ? 

A.     It  is  overwhelmingly  in  favor  of  the  law. 

Q.     And  in  favor  of  maintaining  the  law  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Something  has  been  said  about  the  weight  of  mind  being  in 
opposition  to  this  law ;  I  think,  perhaps,  some  of  that  may  be  dead  weight. 

Q.  The  attempt  has  been  here  made  to  sway  the  legislation  of  the  Com- 
monwealth by  the  weight  of  individual  names ;  do  you  know  of  a  single  live 
man  of  your  church  who  is  opposed  to  this  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  know  of  men,  for  whom  I  have  the  greatest  respect,  who  oppose  this 
law, — men  whom  I  believe  mean  to  be  true  to  their  calling,  and  far  be  it  from 
me  to  call  their  motives  in  question.  Still  I  feel  that  they  are  mistaken. 


APPENDIX.  523 

Q.  Granting  all  that,  are  they  men  in  whom  the  hopes  of  the  church 
centre  to  any  considerable  extent  ? 

A .  The  hopes  of  the  church  will  not  centre  in  them  for  a  great  while  to 
come,  if  they  do  not  change  their  base.  I  have  read  the  testimony  that  has 
been  offered  here,  and  I  know  that  those  gentlemen  who  have  testified  in 
favor  of  a  License  law,  are  thorough- going  total  abstinence  men  in  practice. 
I  make  this  remark,  because  I  wish  to  say  nothing  in  the  course  of  my  remarks 
that  should  seem  to  impugn  the  motives  of  such  men,  and  if  I  should  do  so, 
it  would  be  unintentional.  I  believe  that  generally  they  mean  to  be  as  true 
as  I  mean  to  be ;  but  I  believe  that  in  this  matter  they  are  mistaken,  and  that 
they  will  yet  see  their  mistake.  I  have  intimations — nothing  positive — but  I 
have  received  intimations  that  some  of  them  have  already  been  led  to  doubt 
the  correctness  of  their  position. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  are  not  wedded,  I  suppose,  to  any  particular 
form  of  law,  but  only  in  favor  of  that  which  shall  most  efficiently  promote 
the  cause  of  temperance  ? 

A.    I  think  that  my  predominant  desire  is  to  see  the  people  temperate. 

Q.  I  suppose,  then,  you  have  no  preference  as  to  the  legal  means 
employed  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  that  I  should  be  in  favor  of  a  military  law. 

Q.  I  am  speaking  now  of  civil  law.  You  are  not  wedded  to  any  par- 
ticular policy  of  legislation  ? 

A.     Anything  that  is  reasonable  and  efficient. 

Q.  The  question,  then,  in  your  mind  is,  whether  the  law  now  upon  the 
statute  book,  with  such  modifications  as  are  proposed  by  the  petitioners, 
would  be  the  most  efficient  means  of  promoting  temperance  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Your  opinion  is  that  the  present  law  might  be  made  the  most 
efficient  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  suppose  that  you  do  not  doubt  the  sincerity  of  gentlemen  who 
entertain  different  opinions  ? 

A.     I  do  not  doubt  their  sincerity. 

Q.  Now,  in  ascertaining  whether  you  are  mistaken  in  your  opinion,  or 
they  in  theirs,  we  must  investigate  the  facts  in  regard  to  the  operation  of  the 
present  law,  must  we  not  ? 

A.    It  depends  partly  upon  that. 

Q.     Does  it  not  depend  altogether  upon  that  ? 

A.  If,  by  facts,  you  include  the  nature  of  the  law  itself,  it  does.  There  is 
in  every  law,  I  suppose,  a  sort  of  self-evidencing  authority.  We  judge  before- 
hand of  a  law  that  it  is  fit  to  do  the  work  intended. 

Q.  But  the  ability  to  say  which  of  the  two  policies  would  be  best 
promotive  of  temperance  would  depend,  would  it  not,  upon  an  examination 
of  a  great  many  facts  as  to  the  comparative  efficiency  of  the  two  policies  in 
this  country  and  in  other  countries  ? 

A.  Not  altogether  upon  an  examination  of  the  facts.  I  would  not  go  to 
Europe  to  learn  how  to  govern  Massachusetts.  A  great  many  things  have 
failed  in  Sweden  and  in  Scotland,  and  in  other  countries  of  Europe,  which 


524  APPENDIX. 

you  and  I  know  are  succeeding  very  well  in  this  country.  I  think  that  we 
should  look  at  the  results  of  the  law  that  have  been  manifested  in  this 
country.  To  give  the  facts  their  proper  weight,  we  should  learn  what  results 
were  due  to  the  existence  of  the  law  itself,  and  what  to  other  causes,  inde- 
pendent of  the  law. 

Q.  But  the  question  is  to  be  settled  after  all,  not  upon  any  theory  or 
abstract  principle,  but  by  looking  as  far  as  we  may  be  able  to  the  real  effect 
which  a  measure  is  calculated,  in  the  judgment  of  men,  to  produce,  rather 
than  to  what  we  may  suppose  to  be  the  normal  or  legitimate  tendency  of  the 
law  ?  Is  not  the  legitimate  tendency  of  a  law  to  be  judged  of  by  its  effects  ? 

A.     Not  altogether  by  those  effects  to  which  you  refer. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  else  than  the  effects  actually  produced,  by  which 
practical  legislators  and  practical  men  can  judge  of  the  tendency  and  value 
of  a  law  ?  Is  not  the  legitimate  tendency  of  a  law  chiefly  to  bo  determined 
by  its  effects  ? 

.  A.  I  think  that  I  have  answered  the  question.  I  think  that  there  is  some- 
thing in  a  law  itself  which,  prior  to  any  investigation  of  its  effects  in 
individual  cases,  commends  it  to,  or  condemns  it  in  our  judgment.  That 
a  priori,  or  self-evidencing  power  of  the  law  ought  not  to  be  rejected  in  our 
investigations  as  to  the  tendency  and  value  of  a  law. 

Q.  Would  you  not  also  take  into  consideration  the  probability  of  a  law 
being  executed  for  a  good  purpose  ? 

A.  The  probabilty  ?  Certainly  I  would.  This  legitimate  tendency  of  the 
law  makes  it  probable  that  it  will  be  executed.  If  we  see  a  sharp  axe,  we 
judge  beforehand  that  it  is  suited  for  cutting  down  a  tree,  if  it  is  put  into 
the  hands  of  the  right  man. 

Q.  Still,  the  axe  may  be  used  or  it  may  not  be  used  to  cut  down 
a  tree  ? 

A.  It  may  be  or  it  may  not  be  ;  but  there  is  in  the  axe  itself  a  fitness  for 
that  work. 

Q.  Does  not  the  effect  produced  by  the  axe  depend  entirely  upon  the  use 
that  is  made  of  it  ?  And,  if  the  the  axe  is  blunt,  will  it  produce  the  same 
effect? 

A.  When  the  iron  is  blunt,  it  is  necessary  to  put  forth  more  strength.  I 
prefer  a  sharp  axe  to  a  blunt  one. 

Q.  An  axe  may  be  well  adapted  to  the  cutting  down  of  a  tree,  but  still 
never  cut  one  down  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.  Then  this  law  may  have  in  itself  a  tendency  to  prevent  intemperance, 
but,  if  it  be  contrary  to  the  best  judgment  of  the  people,  will  it  have  the 
legitimate  effect  to  check  that  evil  ? 

A.  It  may  not  have  that  effect  if  the  right  kind  of  men  do  not  take  hold 
of  it  and  execute  it. 

Q.  Is  there  in  the  simple  adaptation  of  this  law  anything  to  produce  the 
force  that  is  necessary  to  execute  it  ? 

A.  We  had,  at  the  outbreak  of  the  rebellion,  arsenals  filled  with  swords 
and  muskets  and  bayonets,  all  of  which  were  very  nicely  adapted  to  the  put- 
ting down  of  this  rebellion,  but  they  had  to  be  put  into  the  hands  of  truly 


APPENDIX.  525 

loyal  men  before  they  did  the  work.  I  would  not  go  back  from  the 
Springfield  musket  to  the  old  Austrian  musket,  nor  from  the  Parrott  gun  to 
the  smooth  bore. 

Q.  If  neither  of  them  were  ever  to  be  used,  you  would  not  make  them, 
would  you  ? 

A.     I  would  make  them ;  yes,  sir. 

Q.     If  they  were  never  to  be  used  ? 

A.  That  is  not  a  question  to  be  considered.  They  ought  to  be  used,  and 
will  be. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  do  not  think  that  it  is  a  sin  to  drink  spirits,  or  a 
glass  of  wine  ? 

A  >     I  explained  the  statement. 

Q.  You  said  that  you  did  not  consider  it  a  sin  under  certain  circum- 
stances ? 

A.  I  believe  that  there  are  circumstances  under  which  it  is  perfectly 
right. 

Q.    In  other  words,  it  is  not,  under  all  circumstances,  a  sin  to  drink  or  sell  ? 

A.     I  say  that  there  are  circumstances  in  which  it  is  not  a  sin. 

Q.  Would  you  then,  think  that  a  law  which  made  such  an  act  a  crime, 
was  right  ? 

A.  The  law  does  not  make  it  a  crime  to  sell.  The  Governor  may  sell,, 
and  the  law  does  not  make  it  a  crime  for  him  to  sell. 

Q.  We  all  have  more  or  less  occasion  to  use  spirits  in  our  families ;  I 
suppose  that  you  do  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  I  was  floated  in  whiskey  and  brandy  for  six  months. 

Q.     Did  you  get  the  liquor  at  the  State  Agency  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  was  at  that  time  in  a  state  of  delirium;  the  liquor  was 
chiefly  contributed  from  the  cellars  of  private  citizens  of  Boston,  who  were 
very  kind  to  me  during  that  sickness. 

Q.  Do  you  not  suppose  that  the  purchase  of  that  liquor  exposed  somebody 
to  the  house  of  correction  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know,  sir. 

Q.    If  it  was  bought  at  any  of  the  liquor-stores  of  Boston,  did  it  not  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  if  it  was  not  bought  of  the  State,  the  purchase  was  con- 
trary to  the  law  of  the  State.  I  do  not  know  how  it  was  obtained.  I  do  not 
know  but  there  may  be  ways  of  obtaining  it  other  than  from  the  State  Agent, 
which  may  not  be  illegal. 

Q.  Have  you  in  any  instance,  gone  to  the  State  Agency  in  Boston  to  .buy 
any  liquor  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  use  any,  other  than  that  you  have  mentioned  ? 

A .  I  will  say  frankly,  that  I  use  wine  as  a  medicine  whenever  a  wise 
physician  says  that  I  must  use  it. 

Q.    Do  you  get  the  wine,  that  he  directs  you  to  use,  at  the  State  Agency  ? 

A.  I  dare  not  get  it  at  the  State  Agency,  because  I  am  afraid  of  its  being 
poisonous. 


526  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Then  unless  you  get  twenty-eight  gallons  at  a  time,  the  person  who 
sells  it  to  you  exposes  himself  to  the  punishment  of  going  to  the  House  of 
Correction. 

A.  Then  I  suppose  that  I  am  also  a  criminal,  and  stand  before  you, 
to-day,  as  a  criminal. 

Q.    Do  you  think  the  law  that  makes  you  a  criminal,  a  wise  one  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  feel,  in  your  own  conscience,  that  you  are  a  criminal  ? 

A.  I  feel  that  I  am  not  a  criminal  in  the  sight  of  God.  "When  the  pro- 
hibitory law  is  administered  according  to  the  designs  of  those  who  passed  it, 
when  we  have  State  Agents  whom  we  can  trust,  when  importers  and  liquor- 
dealers  will  sell  pure  wine  to  the  agencies,  and  not  take  advantage  of  them, 
as  I  understand  they  do,  when  importers  will  cease  to  take  advantage  of  the 
fact  that  these  men  are  State  Agents  to  sell  them  impure  liquors  just  to  bring 
the  law  into  disrepute,  then  when  at  the  point  of  death  we  may  not  be 
compelled  to  break  the  law  for  the  sake  of  saving  our  lives. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  of  the  law  that  requires  you  or  somebody  else  to 
expose  himself  to  the  House  of  Correction,  for  the  sake  of  saving  your  life  ? 

A.     It  k  not  the  law  that  requires  it. 

Q.     What  do  you  think  of  the  expediency  of  such  a  law  ? 

A.  If  I  knew  of  such  a  law,  I  should  consider  it  very  inexpedient.  These 
results  have  not  been  the  legitimate  tendency  of  the  law,  but  result  from  the 
opposition  of  men  to  the  law, — of  men  who  have  been  trying  to  bring  the 
law  into  disrepute. 

Q.  Should  not  every  wise  legislator,  in  the  enactment  of  any  law,  consider 
the  fact  whether  or  not  the  law  can  be  enforced  ? 

A.  I  think  not.  I  think  that  it  would  be  very  difficult,  in  Utah,  to  exe- 
cute the  law  against  polygamy,  yet  I  should  be  in  favor  of  having  such  a 
law. 

Q.  If  the  law  we  have  does  not  produce  the  desired  effect,  and  another 
would  be  more  efficient,  though,  perhaps,  it  might  not  be  your  ideal  of  a  law, 
would  it  not  be  better  to  give  up  a  little  of  your  abstract  theory,  and  have 
the  law  that  would  be  the  most  efficient  ? 

A.  I  would  go  for  the  perfect  law.  If  the  perfect  law  will  not  restrain 
the  evil,  certainly  an  imperfect  law  will  not. 

Q,  When  Moses  made  a  law  granting  divorces,  which  was  contrary  to  the 
law  from  the  beginning — given  under  inspiration,  if  you  please — did  he  do 
wrong  ? 

A.  There  were  many  things  in  the  Hebrew  economy  which  are  not 
examples  for  the  Christian  Church  to  follow.  Slavery,  in  a  certain  form,  and 
polygamy,  in  a  certain  form,  then  existed.  The  Mosaic  economy  was  pecu- 
liar to  a  people,  who  were  yet  to  be  educated  and  fitted  for  the  Christian 
Church. 

Q.  Do  you  or  not  believe  that  it  is  proper  to  have  reference  to  the  fact, 
whether  or  not  a  law  can  be  executed,  when  you  are  enacting  that  law  ? 

A.  1  do,  sir;  and  I  believe  that  those  laws  can,  in  the  long  run,  be  most 
readily  executed  which  beforehand  commend  themselves  to  the  moral  sense 
of  men  as  right  and  just.  I  am  not  a  legislator ;  I  am  not  a  statesman  ;  but  a 


APPENDIX.  527 

moralist.  Perhaps  persons  who  are  familiar  with  legislation  could  answer 
such  a  question  better  than  I  could;  certainly  they  ought  to  be  able  to  give 
an  opinion  which  would  be  worth  more  than  mine. 

Q,  Is  there  not  something  besides  the  law  needful  to  prepare  the  people  to 
obey  it,  and  must  not  that  preparation  be  made' before  the  enactment  of  the 
law  ? 

A.  Undoubtedly.  There  must  be  a  moral  sense  in  men,  and  a  certain 
amount  of  moral  suasion,  perhaps,  used  in  advance ;  and,  above  all,  there 
must  be  a  determination,  on  the  part  of  those  who  are  charged  with  the  exe- 
cution of  the  law,  that  it  shall  be  executed. 

Q.  Must  there  not  be  a  moral  sense  in  the  community,  and  a  pretty 
decided  one,  before  stringent  criminal  laws  can  be  executed  with  any 
effect  ? 

A.  1  think  there  must  be  a  very  decided  moral  sentiment  with  regard  to 
this  prohibitory  law  before  it  will  be  executed  without  making  trouble  in  the 
Commonwealth — before  people  will  obey  it  readily. 

Q.  If  that  moral  sense  be  wanting,  will  the  law  be  effective  for  any 
good? 

A.  Well,  sir,  in  the  case  which  we  are  to  consider,  I  do  not  understand 
that  the  moral  sense  is  wanting ;  and,  therefore,  we  are  not  to  consider  a 
case  where  the  moral  sense  is  wanting.  In  this  case,  which  we  are  to  consider, 
it  seems  to  me  that  the  law  is  practically  perfect. 

Q.  That  is  a  question  of  fact ;  I  am  testing  a  principle,  upon  your  basis 
as  a  moralist.  I  am  testing  the  question  whether,  if  there  be  not  such  a  moral 
sense  as  will  execute  the  law,  the  law  can  be  effective  for  good  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  have  been  accustomed  to  preach  the  absolute  morality.  I 
believe  Christ  preached  it,  and  he  is  my  Master.  And  so  far  as  my  short 
experience  is  any  guide  to  me,  the  man  who  takes  that  ground  in  the  begin- 
ning, and  who  does  not  allow  himself  to  be  pulled  away  from  it  by  surround- 
ing influences,  but  stands  right  there  all  his  life,  Avill  bring  men  round  to  him, 
and  will  accomplish  a  great  deal  more  in  educating  them,  elevating  them, 
and  securing  their  confidence  and  respect,  in  the  long  run,  than  if  he  allows 
himself  to  be  pulled  away  from  that  standard  of  absolute  morality,  and 
begins  by  revolving  these  questions  in  his  mind — "  What  is  expedient  ?  what 
is  practicable  ?  "  and  says,  "  All  this  is  very  well,  but  it  is  visionary  ;  we 
must  be  practical  men."  I  have  never  taken  that  ground,  and  I  am  not 
prepared  to  yet.  I  took  the  stand  where  it  seemed  to  me  my  Master  stood, 
and  by  His  grace  I  hope  to  be  able  to  stand  there  as  long  as  I  stand  anywhere. 

Q.  As  a  moral  and  religious  teacher,  you  take  that  to  be  your  duty,  and  I 
do  not  object  to  it  at  all ;  but  when  you  come  to  legislate,  you  have  got  to 
legislate  for  immediate  effect  upon  communities  and  people  as  they  are  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  shall  not  quarrel  with  statesmen  and  legislators  until  I  see 
the  laws  which  they  have  passed,  as  it  seems  to  me,  producing  a  bad  moral 
effect  in  the  community ;  and  when  I  see  a  law  already  existing  which  com- 
mends itself  to  my  reason  as  adapted  to  produce  a  wholesome  moral  influence 
in  the  community,  I  shall  stand  by  it. 

Q.  Unless  you  find  that  in  its  operation  it  does  wrong  ?  If  it  does  wrong, 
you  would  not  stand  by  it  ? 


528  APPENDIX. 

A-,    No,  sir  ;  not  if  it  does  wrong  through  any  fault  in  itself  ? 

Q.     Suppose  it  does  wrong  by  the  means  which  are  taken  to  execute  it  ? 

A.  If  one  agent  does  not  make  a  good  use  of  the  instrumentality,  we 
must  find  another  who  will. 

Q.  Does  the  execution  of  criminal  laws,  the  infliction  of  fines  and  imprison- 
ment, have  any  tendency,  in  your  opinion,  to  produce  that  moral  change 
which  is  necessary,  as  you  believe,  to  effect  a  reformation  in  any  man  ? 

A.  It  may  not  always  produce  any  moral  change  for  the  better  in  that 
man,  but  its  existence  is  a  great  educating  power  in  the  community. 

Q.     Does  it  have  any  effect  on  that  man  ? 

A.  It  may  not  on  him.  It  would  have  a  different  effect,  probably,  in 
different  cases. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONBB.)  You  know  that  license  laws  have  been  in  exist- 
ence in  this  country  for  one  hundred  and  fifty  years,  do  you  not  ? 

A.    If  you  say  they  have  been,  1  will  believe  it. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  any  license  law  doing  anything  to  restrain  the 
traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks  ? 

A .  My  general  impression  has  been,  that  a  license  law  does  not  do  any- 
thing to  restrain  the  traffic.  And  I  have  this  feeling,  also,  in  regard  to 
licenses.  It  seems  to  me  to  be  a  little  unfair  to  make  business  men  a  State 
police.  There  are  officers  to  do  the  governing,  and  private  individuals  to  do 
the  business. 

Q.  About  what  time  did  you  receive  your  impression  against  the  State 
Agency  ?  Have  you  heard  much  of  it  of  late  years  ? 

A.  I  remarked  that  I  had  heard  that  there  had  been  a  reform  in  that 
respeci ;  and  it  is  my  intention,  before  purchasing  any  more  liquors,  to  make 
a  trial  of  the  liquor  which  is  sold  by  the  State  Agent.  I  intend  to  buy  a 
bottle  at  the  State  Agency  and  have  it  analyzed,  and  if  it  is  pure,  I  shall 
thank  God  and  take  courage. 

Q.  Should  you  feel  more  sure  of  getting  a  pure  article  by  going  to  the 
ordinary  sellers  of  liquor  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  Something  besides  the  question  of  pure  liquors  comes  in 
there. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  STEDMAN  W.  HANKS. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.     In  Lowell.     My  office  is  in  Boston. 

Q.  You  are  District  Secretary  of  the  American  Seaman's  Friend  Society, 
are  you  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  that  is  my  business.  My  work  is  to  keep  their  cause  before 
the  churches  of  the  Commonwealth,  and  of  course  I  am  in  the  country  most 
of  the  time  ;  spend  all  my  Sabbaths  there. 

Q.     You  travel  about  the  country  very  extensively  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  For  thirteen  years  I  have  been  in  that  business,  "  going  to 
fro  in  the  earth." 

Q.     You  are  very  well  acquainted  with  clergymen  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Of  the  five  hundred  and  thirty  clergymen  belonging  to  the 
denomination  with  which  I  am  connected,  I  find  that  I  am  personally 


APPENDIX.  529 

acquainted  with  four  hundred,  at  least.     That  includes  the  professors  in  the 
various  institutions  of  my  own  denomination. 

Q.  Of  the  four  hundred  with  whom  you  are  acquainted,  how  many  are  in 
favor  of  a  license  law  in  preference  to  a  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  From  the  best  estimate  I  can  make  about  the  matter,  I  should  say,  not 
more  than  one  in  forty  or  fifty.  Three  are  in  the  city  of  Boston  ;  I  know  of 
three  more  in  the  rural  districts  with  whom  I  have  conversed  ;  and  there  are 
are  one  or  two  more  of  whom  I  should  say,  from  what  1  have  heard  of  them, 
that  they  are  in  favor  a  license  law.  But,  so  far  as  I  know,  I  should  say 
that  forty-nine  out  of  fifty  clergymen  are  not  in  favor  of  a  license  law,  but  of 
a  prohibitory  law. 

Q.    You  mean  the  clergymen  of  your  denomination  ? 
A.     Yes,  sir.     And  so  far  as  the  clergymen  of  the  Methodist  denomination 
are  concerned,  of  whom  I  know  a  great  many,  I  do  not  know  of  any  who 
favor  a  license  law.      They  all  hold  to  the  doctrine  of  good  old  John 
.Wesley,  that  this  is  a  pretty  bad  business. 

Q.    (By  the  CHAIRMAN.)     What  is  your  denomination  ? 
A.     Orthodox  Congregationalist. 

Q-  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  How  extensively  is  the  law  executed  ? 
A.  I  should  say,  that  outside  of  Boston  and  the  other  cities,  it  was  pretty 
generally  executed,  so  far  as  the  open  sale  is  concerned.  I  do  not  hear  of 
very  many  liquor-shops  in  the  country  towns.  I  have  had  occasion  to  make 
inquiries  about  the  matter,  and  I  find  that  in  most  cases  outside  the  cities,  the 
sale  is  carried  on  in  a  covert,  secret  way,  and  that  the  old  liquor-selling 
establishments  are  closed,  as  places  of  business. 

Q.     Do  you  observe  any  improvement  in  the  cities  in  this  respect  lately  ? 
A.     I  should  think  that  since  the  State  Constables  have  been  at  work  in  the 
cities,  there  has  been  a  decrease  in  the  sale,  but  I  cannot  speak  so  confidently 
about  that.     I  should  think  there  were  less  places  carrying  on  this  business 
since  that  method  of  enforcing  the  law  was  commenced. 

Q.  What  is  the  principal  obstacle  to  the  enforcement  of  the  present  law  ? 
A.  I  have  the  impression  that  the  great  obstacle  in  the  way  of  its  enforce- 
ment is  the  fact,  that  there  are  so  many  men  of  standing  and  influence  in  the 
community  who  prophesy  evil  about  this  matter,  who  say  the  law  cannot  be 
executed ;  and  I  am  sorry  to  say,  that  a  good  many  of  them  in  their  social 
parties  drink  wine,  and  set  an  example  which  is  wrong.  I  think  if  they 
would  take  the  same  ground  that  was  taken  by  Franklin  Pierce  when  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Law  was  passed,  "  The  law  must  be  executed,"  it  would  be. 
Let  the  ground  be  taken  that  our  Governor  took  when  the  war  broke  out, 
"  Put  down  the  rebellion  !  It  must  be  done !  "  and  this  traffic  would  be  put 
down  very  quickly,  I  am  confident.  And  I  want  to  add,  that  I  regard  a 
remark  made  here  by  a  distinguished  physician,  namely,  that  he  did  not  regret 
the  drinking  usages  of  the  community,  as  one  of  the  greatest  obstacles 
conceivable  to  the  execution  of  this  law. 

Q.     What  proportion  of  the  practical  friends  of  temperance,  the  members 
of  temperance  societies,  &c.,  and  the  members  of  churches,  in  your  opinion, 
are  in  favor  of  a  license  law,  as  compared  with  a  prohibitory  law  ? 
67 


530  APPENDIX. 

A.  1  find  two  kinds  of  friends  of  temperance,  very  distinctly  defined.  One 
class  is  the  conservative  class ;  the  other  is  the  radical  class.  The  conserva- 
tive class  go  pretty  strongly  for  license ;  they  do  not  attend  temperance 
meetings  much,  and  take  occasionally  a  glass  of  liquor,  thinking  it,  on  the 
whole,  not  very  bad.  That  class  of  "  friends  "  are,  for  the  most  part,  in  favor 
of  license.  The  other  class,  the  cold-water  temperance  people,  the  total- 
abstainers,  so  far  as  I  know,  all  through  the  community  where  I  have  been, 
are  in  favor  of  the  present  law,  and  of  the  execution  of  that  law. 

Q.    Was  the  law  executed  at  Lowell  at  any  time  ? 

A.  I  was  a  resident  of  Lowell  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  the  law,  and 
had  some  particular  reasons  for  watching  that  thing,  as  it  was  predicted  that 
the  law  would  be  a  failure.  I  went  into  some  of  the  principal  streets,  the  very 
night  after  the  law  went  into  execution,  to  see  whether  the  shops  were  open, 
and  I  found  them  almost  universally  closed  up.  I  went  up  and  down  the 
streets  several  times  on  purpose  to  observe  the  matter,  and  saw  that  the  shops 
were  closed  up  ;  and  on  the  doors  of  some  of  them  there  was  a  piece  of  black 
crape ;  and  some  had  this  inscription,  which  pleased  me  considerably : 
"  Spirits  departed ! "  The  liquor  business  was  closed  up  at  that  time  for  a 
short  period.  Dr.  Miner  was  a  resident  of  Lowell  at  that  time,  and  he  can 
bear  testimony  to  this  fact. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  non-execution  of  the  law  in  Boston  had  any  influence 
in  Lowell  ? 

A.  The  moment  it  was  announced  that  the  law  was  not  executed  in 
Boston,  the  liquor-sellers  opened  there  shops  again,  the  "  spirits  "  came  back, 
and  the  business  went  on. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  authorities  of  Boston  ever  made  a  serious  effort  to 
enforce  the  law  ? 

A.  It  never  seemed  to  me  so.  It  seemed  to  me  that  the  policy  of  the 
Boston  police,  excellent  men  as  they  were,  was  to  get  over  this  matter  as 
easily  as  they  could,  and  to  let  these  criminals  go.  That  has  been  the  result 
of  my  observation.  I  have  not  been  a  resident  of  Boston.  I  come  to  the  city 
in  the  morning,  and  return  in  the  evening. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  of  the  morality  of  selling  intoxicating  drinks  as  a 
beverage  ? 

A .  I  think  it  is  a  wicked  practice  ;  it  is  a  sin  in  every  case.  And  yet  I 
do  not  hold  to  the  theory  that  it  is  wicked  in  all  cases  to  drink  intoxicating 
liquor,  or  to  sell  it.  The  cases  seem  to  me  very  easily  distinguishable,  on  the 
old  principle  settled  by  moral  philosophers,  namely,  that  the  motive  is  to  be 
considered.  When,  for  instance,  a  professor  of  surgery  goes  to  the  Massa- 
chusetts Hospital  and  cuts  off  a  man's  leg,  or  both  of  his  legs,  or  removes  a 
tumor,  it  looks  like  a  very  butchering  business ;  yet  we  do  not  call  that 
wicked.  But,  if  another  professor  operates  upon  a  man  as  Prof.  Webster  did 
upon  Dr.  Parkman,  and  cuts  his  body  up  into  fragments,  it  is  a  very  different 
matter.  Men  are  to  be  judged  by  their  motives.  The  transactions  are  very 
much  alike,  but  the  judgment  of  the  community  upon  the  actors  is  very 
different :  one  is  to  be  commended  ;  the  other  to  be  hanged. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  prohibitory  law  has  helped  the  cause  of  tem- 
perance ? 


APPENDIX.  531 

•A.  I  have  the  impression  decidedly  that  it  has  helped  it  in  this  way:  It 
has  closed  up  a  vast  many  places  where  intoxicating  liquors  were  sold  in  the 
rural  districts.  I  have  been  to  nearly  every  town  in  the  Commonwealth,  and 
have  put  the  question  to  numerous  clergymen,  and  it  is  their  testimony  and 
the  testimony  of  many  persons  in  the  rural  districts,  that  the  law  has  been 
an  essential  help  in  closing  up  these  places. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  the  law  does  considerable  in  educating  the  com- 
munity, and  making  them  think  it  wrong  to  sell  or  drink  intoxicating 
liquors  ? 

A.  Certainly.  I  have  the  impression  that  this  law  has  a  vast  influence  in 
the  community,  considered  as  an  educator  ;  that  it  puts  this  matter  on  the  right 
basis, — that  it  is  a  thing  which  fills  the  prisons  and  almshouses, — and  there- 
fore is  very  useful  in  its  educational  influence  upon  the  community. 

Q.  If  the  law  licenses  a  thing,  is  it  not  a  necessary  consequence  that  it 
thereby  says  it  is  proper  to  be  done,  and  has  a  tendency  to  bring  the  public 
sentiment  to  that  conclusion  ? 

A.  It  seems  to  me  that  it  must  have  that  tendency.  It  would  be  a  very 
sad  thing  for  the  community  to  have  that  ideas  inculcated  in  that  way. 

Q.  We  have  heard  a  great  deal  about  the  increase  of  intemperance.  How 
is  it  now,  according  to  your  observation,  as  compared  with  two  or  three  years 
ago? 

A.  Compared  with  two  or  three  years  ago,  I  should  not  speak  very  con- 
fidently. For  two  or  three  years  the  temperance  cause,  until  the  last  year, 
perhaps,  has  been  somewhat  at  a  stand.  Within  the  last  year  or  two,  I  think 
the  cause  has  made  great  progress  ;  but  looking  back  ten  years,  and  more  par- 
ticularly, twenty  years,  it  seems  to  me  that  in  the  rural  districts,  the  change 
has  been  perfectly  enormous  to  anybody  who  will  be  candid.  The  sale  of 
liquor  at  the  grocery  shops  is  stopped.  In  my  own  town,  where  I  have  been 
bookkeeper  in  two  liquor-selling  establishments,  and  knew  every  family  in  the 
place  when  I  was  there,  the  change  is  very  marked.  I  can  tell  by  the  num- 
ber of  rags  and  old  hats  stuck  in  the  windows,  and  the  number  of  persons  in 
the  poor-house  and  prison.  The  change  is  very  easily  perceptible  to  anybody 
who  goes  through  these  places  with  his  eyes  open. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  a  license  law,  from  your  observation,  or  anything 
you  have  heard,  that  did  anything  to  restrain  the  traffic  ? 

A.  I  have  some  knowledge  in  regard  to  the  old  license  law  passed  about 
1835  or  '36.  That  law  was  in  existence  when  I  was  at  college,  and  I  had  an 
opportunity  to  observe  its  operation,  because  I  belonged  to  a  temperance  asso- 
ciation, and  we  watched  it.  In  that  place,  there  was  a  license  given  to  an 
apothecary,  who  appeared  before  the  committee  and  stated  his  reason  for 
wanting  a  license.  He  said  that  he  had  $1,200  worth  of  liquors,  and  wanted 
a  license  in  order  that  he  might  dispose  of  his  liquor,  otherwise  he  would  meet 
with  pecuniary  loss.  They  granted  it.  He  was  a  very  good  sort  of  a  man, 
and  probably  intended  to  do  his  duty.  Liquor  was  freely  sold  in  that  place. 
That  license  passed  into  the  hands  of  another  man,  who  was  a  strong  temper- 
ance man  when  he  took  it ;  he  became  a  drunkard,  had  delirium  tremens, 
walked  into  the  river,  and  was  drowned.  It  passed  into  the  hands  of  another 
man,  a  member  of  the  church.  He  broke  down  in  character,  made  the 


532  APPENDIX. 

church  a  great  deal  of  trouble ;  the  license  was  taken  from  him,  and  he  went 
on  selling  liquor  without  a  license.  That  is  a  case  which  I  call  to  mind 
which  I  investigated  at  the  time,  and  re-investigated  in  the  very  place,  calling 
upon  some  of  the  old  inhabitants  to  give  me  the  facts  about  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  regard  the  public  sentiment  that  is  entertained 
by  at  least  a  part  of  the  community, — the  higher  class,  or  the  class  that  use 
their  wine,  etc., — as  an  obstacle  to  the  enforcement  of  this  law  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  I  think  it  is  a  very  great  obstacle. 

Q.  How  do  you  propose  to  remove  that  obstacle,  or  change  that  public 
sentiment  ? 

A.  I  propose  to  do  what  I  can  in  the  way  of  love  and  persuasion,  and  the 
rest  by  law. 

Q.  Have  you  seen,  within  the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years,  any  effect  produced 
upon  that  class  of  men  both  by  law  and  love  ? 

A.  I  think  they  are  something  like  the  boy  in  the  tree  stealing  apples. 
We  have  been  throwing  turf  at  them,  and  if  they  are  still  disposed  to  sell 
liquor,  I  think  the  constable  should  throw  stones,  and  bring  them  down  in 
that  way. 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say  that  those  persons  who  occasionally  drink 
liquor  and  furnish  it  at  parties  were  the  great  obstacles  ? 

A .    Yes,  sir ;  I  said  so.     That  is  my  impression. 

Q.     How  do  you  propose  to  change  the  opinion  of  these  men  ? 

A.  I  propose  to  show  them  the  bad  influence  of  that,  and  I  propose  to 
have  the  law  so  thoroughly  executed  that  they  will  be  under  the  necessity  of 
getting  their  liquor  at  the  agency,  and  complying  with  the  requirements  of  the 
law. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  has  been  any  change,  for  the  last  ten  or  twelve 
years,  in  the  sentiment  of  that  class  of  people  towards  the  prohibitory  law, 
or  in  regard  to  the  use  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  am  very  much  afraid  that  that  class  of  people  have  not  been  affected 
by  the  law  or  by  moral  suasion.  I  am  afraid  that  some  of  them  will  come  to 
the  drunkard's  terrible  end,  notwithstanding  they  occupy  high  positions. 

Q.  There  .has  been  no  perceptible  effect,  by  the  instrumentalities  of  both 
love  and  law,  on  that  class  of  men,  so  far  as  you  know  ? 

A.     So  far  as  I  know,  I  do  not  think  they  have  been  very  much  restrained. 

Q.  What  is  your  observation  in  regard  to  the  use  of  liquors  by  that  class 
of  men  during  the  last  fifteen  'or  sixteen  years  ?  Is  it  greater  than  it  was  in 
1840, '41, '2, '3, '4  and '5? 

A.    I  am  not  able  to  say  about  that. 

Q.  Are  there  not  more  families  who  now  use  it  as  a  beverage,  and  furnish 
it  to  friends  occasionally,  within  the  sphere  of  your  acquaintance,  than  fifteen 
or  twenty  years  ago  ? 

A.  According  to  my  observation,  I  should  say  not.  I  should  say,  from  my 
observation  in  families  where  I  visit,  and  at  parties,  that  the  state  of  things  is 
very  different  from  what  it  was. 

Q.  Do  you  see  much  of  the  class  of  persons  to  whom  you  allude,  to  know 
their  private  habits  ? 


APPENDIX.  533 

A.  No,  sir.  I  do  not  know  about  their  private  habits.  I  think  very 
likely  that  when  I  visit  them,  they  do  not  use  the  wine  quite  so  much  as  they 
might  in  other  cases.  I  do  not  drink  it  myself. 

Q.     That  you  say  is  the  great  obstacle  ? 

A.     One  great  obstacle. 

Q.  Is  it  not  the  greatest,  in  your  opinion,  to  the  realization  of  what  you 
and  all  temperance  men,  I  have  no  doubt,  desire  ? 

A.  I  should  hardly  be  able  to  make  the  comparison.  I  should  say  it  was 
a  very  great  obstacle,  but  that  there  are  other  very  great  obstacles. 

Q.  Do  you  see  anything  in  the  present  instrumentalities  that  tends  to 
change  that  sentiment  and  practice  much  among  that  class  of  people  ? 

A.  Only  so  far  as  truth  is  being  spread.  Their  children  are  being  edu- 
cated, and  information  circulated  in  the  community  in  regard  to  the  terrible 
consequences  of  the  use  of  liquor. 

Q.  Do  you  get  many  of  the  children  of  these  families,  to  sign  the  cold- 
water  pledge  ? 

A .  A  great  many  of  them.  That  is  regarded  as  a  very  important  matter 
in  these  families.  They  generally  say  to  their  children,  "  You  had  better 
sign  the  pledge  "  —  or  many  of  them  do  so. 

Q.     You  do  not  think  their  preaching  is  very  effective,  do  you  ? 

A.     Not  so  effective  as  it  would  be  if  they  dispensed  with  their  liquors. 

Q.    Is  there  not  an  obstacle  to  the  enforcement  of  this  law  resulting  from 

G 

this  fact ;  that,  while  the  law  makes  it  a  house-of-correction  offence  to  sell,  it 
makes  it  no  offence  to  buy  or  drink  ? 

A.  Well,  it  always  seemed  to  me  a  very  difficult  thing  to  make  a  law 
about  what  people  should  eat  or  drink.  There  is  a  law  against  selling  tainted 
meat,  but  there  is  no  law  against  eating  it,  and  any  man  can  have  a  full 
dinner  of  that  sort  of  meat  if  he  chooses,  and  the  law  cannot  touch  him, 
because  he  is  in  his  own  domicile.  That  is  the  view  I  take  of  it. 

Q.  Is  it  not,  after  all,  an  obstacle  to  the  enforcement  of  the  law,  that  it 
contains  that  feature  ? 

A.  I  think  the  present  law  is  constructed  as  well  as  any  law  could  be.  It 
does  make  provision  for  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  for  legitimate  purposes, 
and  properly,  I  think. 

Q.     Do  the  people  of  Lowell  avail  themselves  of  those  provisions  to  get  it  ? 

A.  I  am  sorry  to  say,  that  a  great  many  of  them  get  what  they  want  at 
the  grocers',  and  do  not  patronize  the  liquor  agency  ;  but  a  good  many  do.  I 
am  sorry  so  many  have  the  impression  that  the  liquor  is  bad  at  the  agency. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  do  the  people  of  Lowell  who  buy  and  use  liquor, 
go  to  the  liquor  agency,  to  any  considerable  extent  ? 

A.    I  should  think  a  great  deal  was  sold  that  is  not  sold  at  the  agency. 

Q.     What  proportion,  should  you  say  ? 

A.     I  am  not  able  to  say. 

Q.  I  see  that  in  1864,  there  were  six  hundred  and  forty-nine  dollars'  worth 
sold  at  the  State  agency  in  Lowell.  You  do  not  think  that  covers  the  whole 
consumption  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.    Would  that  be  any  perceptible  approach  towards  covering  it  ? 


534  APPENDIX. 

A.  No,  sir.  I  think  most  of  the  wholesale  traffic  there  has  been  carried 
on  in  the  liquor-selling  establishments.  I  get  all  the  liquor  I  want — which  is 
not  much — at  the  agency,  and  get  very  good  liquor,  too. 

Q.     If  you  used  a  great  deal,  you  would  hardly  go  there  ? 

A.     1  think  I  should  still  trust  the  agency,  rather  than  the  grocers,  sir. 

Q.     How  is  the  fact  as  to  liquor  being  extensively  sold  in  Lowell  ? 

A.  I  think  there  is  a  great  deal  of  liquor-selling  in  that  city  ;  no  doubt 
of  it,  Mr.  Child  ;  but  no  more,  according  to  the  population,  than  formerly  ; 
and  among  Americans,  I  should  think  not  so  much. 

Q.  In  1845,  when  we  used  to  have  weekly  temperance  meetings,  was  there 
as  much  liquor  sold  there  as  now  ? 

A.  I  should  think  so.  About  1844, 1  was  made  aware  of  the  remarkable 
fact,  which  affected  me  a  great  deal,  that  thirty  young  men  were  carried 
home  drunk  from  a  certain  saloon,  at  a  festival,  in  one  night.  (You  know 
where  it  is,  though  you  do  not  get  your  liquor  there.)  I  followed  one  of  my 
church-members  in  there  once  to  watch  him,  as  his  shepherd,  and  to  see  what 
was  going  on  there,  and  was  invited  to  preach  ;  and  I  said  if  they  would  let 
me  take  for  my  text,  "  Out  of  the  belly  of  hell  cried  I,"  I  would  preach  a 
sermon  there  ;  but  they  would  not  allow  it. 

Q.  As  to  the  habit  of  drinking,  how  is  it  now  in  Lowell,  as  compared  with 
1845? 

A.  Among  the  foreigners,  I  should  think  there  was  more  drinking;  among 
Americans,  I  shouldn't  think  it  was  so.  I  shouldn't  think  there  were  so  many 
young  men  intoxicated  as  there  used  to  be. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  from  1845,  for  two,  three  or  four  years  after  I 
went  to  Lowell,  the  drinking  of  liquor  was  almost  unknown  throughout  the 
Lowell  population  ? 

A.     I  know  it  was  greatly  restrained  in  the  mills. 

Q.     Is  it  so  now  ? 

A.  I  think  there  is  a  great  deal  of  liquor  drank,  but  I  am  not  aware  that 
there  is  more  drank  than  at  that  time.  I  do  not  go  into  the  mills  now  as  I 
used  to,  and  do  not  know  how  the  fact  is  there. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  fact,  that  the  use  of  liquor  in  the  mills  was  almost  entirely 
restrained  at  that  time  ? 

A.  It  was.  The  drinking  of  liquor  was  not  allowed  on  the  ground  there, 
but  that  the  people  who  worked  at  the  mill  got  their  liquor  at  the  shops  and 
used  it  in  their  families,  to  some  extent,  I  know  very  well. 

Q.     Do  you  know  pn  what  conditions  the  men  were  hired  ? 

A.     In  one  or  two  mills  I  do,  but  not  in  all. 

Q-    "Can  they  hire  men  now  on  condition  that  they  shall  not  drink  ? 

A.  I  am  not  aware  how  that  is  now.  I  know  that  the  sale  was  prohibited 
in  the  corporations,  and  no  license  was  even  given  for  it. 

Q.  Has  the  cause  of  temperance  ever  been  so  prosperous  in  Lowell  as  it 
was  then,  from  that  time  to  this  ? 

A.  Well,  I  think  the  cause  has  been  somewhat  at  a  stand  since  new  influ- 
ences have  come  in — the  war,  &c.,  distracting  attention  from  it. 

Q.  Prior  to  the  war,  before  I  left  Lowell,  in  1860,  was  the  cause  of  tem- 
perance in  so  good  a  condition  as  it  was  in  '46,  '47,  and  '48  ? 


APPENDIX.  535 

A.     I  should  think  that  there  had  not  been  any  great  progress  made. 

Q.     Was  it  not  worse  ? 

A.  I  should  not  be  ready  to  say  it  was  a  great  deal  worse  than  it  was, 
really.  I  did  not  see  any  evidence  of  it. 

Q.     You  have  seen  no  progress  since  that  time  ? 

A.  Well,  I  have  not  seen  that  marked  progress  which  I  have  seen  at  other 
times. 

Q.  When  the  temperance  reformation  was  at  work,  and  the  whole  com- 
munity were  united  upon  those  means,  was  there  not  progress,  very  visible 
progress  ?  Was  not  the  change  from  1835  to  '45  very  marked  ? 

A.     A  very  great  change  was  wrought  in  that  way. 

Q.  That  was  under  the  same  law  exactly  that  is  proposed  by  these  peti- 
tioners, and  you  say  there  was  a  very  great  change  under  that  law  ? 

A.  There  was  a  great  change  wrought  by  discussing  the  matter  and  circu- 
lating information  about  it.  The  cause  went  forward,  but  there  were  a  good 
many  moderate  drinkers  then. 

Q.  But  was  not  the  tone  of  temperance  feeling  in  the  community  very 
much  elevated  among  almost  all  people  who  called  themselves  respectable  ? 

A.    It  was,  among  a  very  large  class. 

Q.     Is  that  so  to-day  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Among  as  large  a  class  ? 

A.  I  think  very  likely  there  may  be  some  more  liquor  drank ;  but  there  is 
a  strong  temperance  tone  among  the  same  class  of  people.  In  the  churches, 
for  instance,  of  all  denominations,  I  find  that  almost  to  a  man  they  are  in 
favor  of  the  total-abstinence  principle. 

Q.  That  is  not  the  question.  The  question  is,  Which  is  the  best  way  of 
promoting  the  cause  of  temperance  ?  It  was  promoted,  and  great  progress 
made,  with  the  same  sort  of  law  which  these  petitioners  propose.  Another 
system  was  introduced,  and  the  cause  has  not  advanced,  you  admit.  Now, 
do  you  think  that  the  effect  of  this  prohibitory  law  has  been  such  that  there 
has  been  the  same  advance  from  1858  to  1867  as  there  was  from  1835  to 
1845? 

A.  I  am  sorry  to  say  I  think  there  has  not  been  so  much  progress.  I  think 
the  law  has  been  too  much  relied  upon,  and  moral  suasion  has  been  neglected, 
and  other  causes  have  come  in  and  operated  upon  the  community. 

Q.  Has  there  not  been  a  great  change  in  the  relaxing  of  those  moral  efforts 
which  were  so  efficiently  used  before  ? 

A.     I  do  not  find  the  cause  of  the  change  in  the  law  at  all. 

Q.  I  do  not  speak  of  the  law.  I  ask  you  if,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  there  has 
not  been  a  great  relaxation  of  those  efforts  which  characterized  the  temper- 
ance reformation  from  1835  to  1845  ? 

A .  Yes,  sir.  The  temperance  people,  to  some  extent,  made  the  great 
mistake,  when  the  law  was  enacted,  of  relying  upon  that.  It  was  an  excellent 
axe,  but  they  let  it  lie.  They  needed  to  cut  something  down  with  it. 

Q.    And  as  they  relied  upon  the  law,  those  efforts  were  given  up  ? 


536  APPENDIX. 

A.  To  some  extent ;  but  still  the  temperance  people  have  been  a  sort  of 
live  people  always  in  that  matter.  I  mean  the  radical  temperance  people  ;  I 
do  not  mean  the  other  class. 

Q.  Have  you  as  many  open  public  temperance  meetings  as  before  the 
passage  of  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  We  have  not  so  many  excellent  orators  to  call  the  people  out  as  when 
you  were  going  for  this  prohibitory  law,  to  say  nothing  about  myself.  We  had 
great  meetings  then,  and  went  for  the  law. 

Q.     You  went  for  the  law  as  it  was,  did  you  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  and  we  went  for  prohibiting  further  the  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquor.  Some  of  our  best  speeches  were  to  this  point :  We  must  have  a 
stronger  law.  Excellent  speeches  they  were — I  call  them  to  mind  distinctly — 
and  the  sentiment  of  the  community  was  to  sustain  them. 

Q.  Was  not  this  it,  after  all,  that  they  thought  the  prohibitory  law  was 
going  to  execute  itself,  and  they  would  have  the  reformation,  and  there  was 
no  longer  any  need  of  these  moral  efforts  ? 

A.  I  am  sorry  to  say  a  great  many  temperance  people  made  that  mistake. 
The  mill  was  a  very  good  one,  but  the  water  got  down  somewhat,  and  it  did 
not  grind. 

Q.  No  matter  how  good  your  mill  is,  unless  you  get  a  working  force  on,  it 
will  not  do  anything,  will  it  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  We  must  have  a  public  sentiment.  That  is  the  water  to 
carry  it. 

Q.  The  public  sentiment  now  is  not  so  good  as  then,  for  the  execution  of 
a  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  Within  the  last  two  years  things  have  come  up  again.  The  streams 
are  rising,  the  floods  are  coming,  the  mill  is  beginning  to  work,  and  it  is 
grinding  up  these  folks  considerably. 

Q.     Have  they  closed  the  liquor-shops  in  Lowell  ? 

A.    I  excepted  the  cities.     In  the  cities,  the  business  goes  on. 

Q.     Have  the  liquor-shops  been  closed  in  Lowell  ? 

A.  They  have  not,  all  of  them ;  not  many  of  them.  We  are  in  a  bad 
case  there. 

Q.    Is  not  liquor  sold  there  as  openly  as  tea  and  coffee  ? 

A.  It  is,  sir,  I  am  sorry  to  say.  I  want  to  say  this  much,  however:  that 
these  liquor-shops  do  not  make  as  much  display  at  their  windows  as  they  used 
to.  I  am  not  able  to  tell,  when  I  go  by,  where  liquor  is  sold.  Where  there 
were  formerly  bottles  in  the  windows,  I  see  an  apple,  a  stick  of  candy,  or  a 
cigar,  which  I  suppose  indicates  the  character  of  the  place  to  persons  who 
understand  it,  but  the  bottles  are  not  there. 

Q.     They  sell  liquor  there  ? 

A.  I  suppose  they  do.  I  see  people  drunk  there,  and  therefore  I  suppose 
they  do. 

Q.  Is  there  any  benefit  in  closing  the  liquor  shops  in  Boston,  or  elsewhere, 
if  three  or  four  are  opened  in  secret  places  for  every  one  that  is  closed  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  When  the  public  sale  is  put  down,  I  think  it  is  a  vast  gain. 
It  is  exactly  analogous  to  brothels.  There  will  be  vastly  less  young  men 
tempted  as  long  as  the  brothels  are  kept  secret.  Run  out  a  sign, 


APPENDIX.  537 

and  I  tell  you  our  young  men  will  be  in  vastly  more  danger,  as  I  look  at  the 
matter.     I  bold,  therefore,  that  vast  progress  has  been  made  in  this  thing. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  To  go  back  to  1845,  when  things  were  going  on 
so  well,  was  it  not  under  a  prohibitory  law,  practically  ?  Did  anybody  sell 
liquor  legally  in  Lowell  ? 

A.  I  think  the  system  of  licensing  then  prevailed;  but  what  was  sold, 
was  sold  illegally. 

Q.    Did  they  not  refuse-  licenses  there  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     So  that  practically  you  had  a  prohibitory  law  ? 

Mr.  CHILD.     That  is  true. 

WITNESS.  If  brother  Child  will  testify  to  that  fact,  I  will  to  the  other, 
that  there  was  great  progress  there.  We  went  into  the  matter  most  zealously 
— brother  Child  among  others. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Was  not  the  effort  there  to  secure  something  like 
the  present  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was.  I  remember  being  a  great  deal  affected  by  a  speech  of 
Mr.  Child,  in  which  he  said  that  he  would  rather  have  his  boy  brought  home 
stabbed  by  a  dagger,  than  brought  home  drunk.  Therefore  he  wanted  a  law 
to  put  it  down.  And  I  said  Amen  to  that. 

Q.  Was  not  the  mill  population  far  more  largely  American  then  than 
now? 

A.  That  is  patent  to  everybody.  When  I  first  became  a  resident  of 
Lowell,  the  persons  employed  in  the  mills  were  excellent  young  ladies,  from 
the  various  New  England  States ;  a  very  different  class  from  what  they  are 
now. 

Q.  Was  not  the  influence  of  the  Superintendent,  Mr.  Child,  very  effective 
in  bringing  about  the  state  of  things  which  then  existed  ? 

A.  Certainly.  The  influence  of  his  public  speeches  was  excellent.  A 
first-rate  worker  he  was. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  a  time,  in  1845,  when  so  large  a  number  of  prosecu- 
tions hung  over  the  heads  of  certain  dealers  there,  and  particularly  over  the 
head  of  the  keeper  of  a  fashionable  saloon,  that,  for  a  very  brief  period,  the 
traffic  was  stopped  ? 

A.  Certainly.  That  very  man  said  to  me,  "  I  have  turned  my  decanters 
bottom  side  up,  and  if  you  will  keep  still,  I  won't  sell."  I  said  to  him,  "  My 
young  men  are  coming  into  your  place  to  get  drunk,  and  we  will  make  you 
trouble  if  you  don't  stop  it."  Said  he,  "  Mr.  Hanks,  I  have  stopped  it.  I  have 
turned  my  decanters  bottom  side  up."  That  was  the  very  expression  he  used. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  theoretically  and  practically,  was  not  the  sale  of 
liquor  prohibited,  and  were  not  these  effects  produced  by  this  prohibition  ? 

A.     I  should  say  so,  certainly. 

Q.  Did  we  not  feel  at  that  time,  that  it  was  the  inefficiency  of  the  city 
authorities,  together  with  the  course  pursued  by  the  other  cities,  particularly 
Boston,  that  let  the  liquor-sellers  loose  again  ? 

A.  Certainly ;  that  was  our  complaint.  On  one  occasion,  a  pamphlet  was 
published,  at  the  expense  of  the  city,  against  prohibition. 

Q.     Was  not  the  honorable  counsel  on  the  other  side  aware  of  these  facts  ? 
68 


538  APPENDIX. 

A.  Certainly.  We  worked  together  on  this  principle,  when  we  were 
neighbors,  and  with  a  good  deal  of  success. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  know  how  much  more  brother  Child 
had  for  his  temperance  addresses  than  he  has  for  his  advocacy  of  the  license 
system  ? 

A.  I  know  we  did  not  pay  him  anything.  He  was  always  ready  to  make 
a  speech,  and  a  very  good  one,  too..  We  only  gave  him  a  vote  of  thanks,  and 
backed  him  up  as  well  as  we  could.  That  is  all  I  know  about  that. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Do  you  know  whether  you  have  any  of  these 
organizations  of  Good  Templars,  &c.,  in  Lowell '? 

A.     I  believe  there  are  some  there. 

Q.     Do  you  know  how  many  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know. 

Q.     You  do  not  belong  to  any  of  them  ? 

A.     No,  sir  ;  I  do  not. 

Q.     They  are  secret  ? 

A.     Well,  they  are  like  masonry.     You  know  about  that. 

Q.  You  know  about  the  Know-Nothings,  do  you  not  V  You  took  the  oath 
there  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir.     We  tripped  up  a  good  many  rogues  at  that  time. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  HORATIO  WOOD. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     You  are  city  missionary  of  Lowell,  I  believe  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    For  how  many  years  have  you  filled  that  position  ? 

A.     Twenty-three  years. 

Q.  You  have  been  sustained  by  individual  charities  from  all  classes  of 
citizens  in  your  labors  of  love  ? 

A .  Yes,  sir.  In  part  sustained  by  the  corporations,  and  in  part  by  the 
citizens  at  large. 

Q.     Denominationally,  your  rank  is  what  ? 

A.  I  have  no  present  rank  in  a  denomination.  I  stand  in  my  position 
independent  of  any  denomination. 

Q.    You  have  sustained,  I  believe,  at  some  period,  Unitarian  relationships  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    And  I  suppose  still  retain  your  sympathies  in  that  direction  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  state  what  occurs  to  you  as  valuable,  bearing  on  the  contro- 
versy here  going  forward,  as  deduced  from  your  observation  and  experience  ? 

A.  I  must  say,  with  regard  to  the  prohibitory  law,  that  I  cannot  but  give 
my  mind  in  favor  of  it  rather  than  of  the  license  system,  from  what  I  have 
seen  of  its  workings,  especially  when  it  was  first  enacted.  It  was  my  good 
fortune  then  to  see  a  picture  which  has  delighted  my  memory  ever  since. 
The  sale  of  liquor  was  stopped  in  Lowell,  so  that  the  City  Marshal  had  occa- 
sion to  say,  in  a  letter  which  he  wrote  to  me  at  that  time,  that  there  was  not 
a  single  place  in  Lowell  where  liquor  was  openly  sold. 

Q.  In  your  judgment,  would  that  state  of  things  have  continued  had  there 
been  a  faithful  execution  of  the  law  ? 


APPENDIX.  539 

A.  At  first,  there  was  an  idea  that  the  law  was  going  to  be  carried  out, 
and  it  must  be  succumbed  to ;  but  after  a  while  it  began  to  be  asked,  What  is 
Boston  going  to  do  in  the  matter  ?  And  when  that  question  was  asked,  it 
began  to  be  said,  that  Boston  was  going  to  sell.  Then  some  began  to  make 
themselves  bold  to  sell,  and  one  city  after  another  of  our  principal  cities  fell 
into  the  sale.  Lowell  fell  in  last  of  all.  She  was  rather  slow  to  wheel  into 
the  line  of  sale. 

Q.  So  that  there  was  good  reason  to  think,  from  the  appearance  of  things, 
that  if  the  law  had  been  executed  elsewhere,  Lowell  would  have  cheerfully 
executed  and  obeyed  it  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  The  temperance  people  and  others  were  delighted  with  the 
change  in  the  state  of  things,  particularly  with  regard  to  the  laboring  class 
and  the  poor. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  the  change  observed  in  the  condition 
of  the  poor  ? 

A.  A  great  many  persons  who  had  been  accustomed  to  drink  gave  up 
drinking  entirely.  There  were  some  who  would  have  liquor  in  their  houses. 
They  would  go  beyond  the  line  of  the  State,  and  get  the  liquor  in  New 
Hampshire,  where  shanties  were  set  up  for  the  purpose  of  vending  it.  But 
then  it  required  more  money  to  buy  the  liquor  in  any  quantity  than  poor 
people  generally  had,  and  they  soon  got  sick  of  that,  and  neglected  to  go  after 
the  liquor.  One  after  another  they  would  say,  "  Well,  we  know  it  is  best  for 
us."  The  wife  would  say,  "  Husband,  you  know  it  is  best  for  you.  You 
know  we  have  been  a  great  deal  happier  and  a  great  deal  more  respected 
since  this  law  was  passed."  And  I  will  say  here — what  I  wish  distinctly 
understood  in  regard  to  the  poor  of  Lowell — that  there  is  not  so  much  a 
desire  on  their  part  for  liquor,  but  by  the  temptations  around  them,  they  are 
led  into  it ;  and  not  only  led  into  it,  but  they  are  cajoled  and  pressed,  in 
every  way,  into  the  purchase  of  liquor.  Those  who  sell  are  constantly  endeav- 
oring to  excite,  among  the  laboring  and  lower  class  of  people,  a  feeling  against 
any  restriction  on  the  sale  of  liquor.  It  is  the  influence  of  those  who  sell 
liquor,  operating  upon  this  class  in  direct  and  indirect  ways,  that  causes  them 
to  drink  to  the  extent  they  do. 

Q.  So  far  as  your  observation  goes,  you  think  that  the  very  class  of  men 
who  cry  out  that  the  law  cannot  be  executed,  have  done  all  they  could  to 
prevent  it  from  being  executed,  and  to  keep  up  a  feeling  of  irritation  about 
the  law  on  the  part  of  those  who  can  be  induced  to  drink  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     That  is  the  result  of  your  observation  among  the  poor  of  Lowell  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  that  has  been  the  result  of  my  observation  during  the  years  I 
have  been  there — twenty-three  years.  I  feel  bound  to  say  that. 

Q.  In  general,  should  you  say  there  is  anything  in  the  present  attitude  of 
the  cause  in  Lowell  to  create,  in  the  mind  of  any  candid,  wise  man,  a  feeling 
that  we  ought  to  abandon  prohibition  ? 

A.     There  is  not,  sir. 

Q.  You  feel  confirmed  in  the  correctness  of  the  policy  of  prohibition  under 
all  this  experience  ? 


540  APPENDIX. 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  think  there  has  been  no  increase  of  any  consequence,  per- 
haps, in  the  amount  of  liquor  drank  within  a  year  or  two.  During  the  war 
there  was  an  increase,  and  that  has  continued  since.  Then  men's  minds  were 
engrossed  altogether  by  the  war,  and  the  subject  of  temperance  they  would 
not  think  of.  We  could  not  hold  a  temperance  meeting  in  Huntington  Hall, 
and  have  anything  like  a  good  audience.  People  would  not  give  their  atten- 
tion to  it.  Their  minds  swung  away  from  it,  and  that  gave  the  liquor-sellers, 
and  those  in  favor  of  the  sale,  free  play. 

Q.    You  do  not  attribute  that,  in  any  degree,  to  the  law  ? 

A.    Not  at  all  to  the  law. 

Q.     You  heard  the  testimony  of  Mr.  Hanks  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Should  you  materially  differ  from  him  in  his  general  view  of  the 
subject  ? 

A.     No,  sir,  I  think  not. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  How  long  did  this  closing  of  the  liquor-shops  in 
Lowell,  immediately  after  the  passage  of  the  law,  continue  ? 

A .  The  effect  continued  about  two  years,  I  should  think— not  the  striking 
effect. 

Q.  I  refer  to  the  general  closing  up.  How  long  was  it  before  they  began 
to  open  again  ? 

A.     They  began  to  open,  I  should  think,  in  about  six  months'  time. 

Q.     Has  there  been  any  effectual  closing  of  the  places  since  that  time  ? 

A.     I  cannot  say  that  there  has  been,  sir. 

Q.  Then  for  six  months  they  were  closed,  and  since  those  six  months, 
liquor  has  been  sold,  publicly  and  openly,  in  Lowell  ? 

A.    It  was  not  sold  so  freely  afterwards  as  before. 

Q.     It  was  sold  publicly  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  is  it  now  ? 

A.  It  is  now  sold  publicly.  The  State  Constabulary  have  not  acted  to 
that  extent  and  with  that  energy  in  Lowell  that  they  have  here,  and  I  think 
there  is  little  perceptible  difference  yet.  There  is  no  great  difference  yet,  in 
the  sale  or  use  of  rum. 

Q.  From  1852  to  '60,  how  was  it  in  regard  to  temperance  meetings  in  Hun- 
tington Hall  ?  Were  there  as  many  as  before  ? 

A.  I  should  think  a  part  of  the  time  there  might  have  been  ;  but  as  near 
as  I  can  recollect,  I  should  think  a  large  portion  of  the  time  there  was  not. 
The  law  was  considered  so  excellent,  that  there  was  more  trust  in  -the  law 
than  there  should  have  been. 

Q.  Have  not  some  of  those  who  profess  to  be  friends  of  temperance 
engaged  in  forming  a  good  many  of  these  secret  temperance  organizations 
there  ? 

A.  I  know  very  little  about  those  organizations.  I  know  very  little  about 
any  temperance  organizations.  I  never  joined  a  temperance  organization  in 
my  life,  and  I  have  always  acted  independently  of  any  temperance  organiza- 
tion. 


APPENDIX.  541 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  are  there  not  a  number  of  these  secret  organiza- 
tions in  Lowell  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell  -what  their  secresy  is.  I  know  that  the  Good  Templars 
are  in  existence  there. 

Q.     Are  there  not  several  organizations  under  that  name  ? 

A.    I  cannot  say  how  many.     There  are  some  two  or  three. 

Q.     Do  you  understand  them  to  be  secret  organizations  ? 

A.  1  have  not  heard  that  subject  mooted  at  all.  I  have  given  no  attention 
to  it.  I  am  an  entire  stranger  to  the  society,  and  can  give  no  testimony  at 
all  in  regard  to  it.  I  can  merely  give  testimony  as  to  facts. 

Q.    You  were  there  in  1845,  '46,  '47  and  '48  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  the  cause  of  temperance  then  more  effective  than  it  has  been 
since  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  The  State  Constabulary  have  produced  no  apparent  effect  in  Lowell 
in  closing  the  places  where  liquor  is  sold  ? 

A.    I  said  so. 

Q.    Nor  in  the  sale  ? 

A.    Not  very  perceptibly. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EX-MAYOR  JOSIAH  PEABODY. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     You  have  held  the  office  of  Mayor  of  Lowell  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     At  what  period  ? 

A.     1865  and  '66. 

Q.    You  have  been  a  resident  of  Lowell  for  many  years  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir.    Ever  since  1824. 

Q.  You  have  been  cognizant  throughout  of  the  doings  of  the  city  govern- 
ment, and  the  attitude  of  this  question  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  to  some  considerable  extent. 

Q.  Will  you  state  briefly  to  the  Committee  the  results  of  your  observation 
and  reflection  upon  the  subject  ? 

A.  Well,  perhaps  it  is  more  intimately  .connected  with  the  past  two  years 
than  any  other  time.  In  1864,  there  were  no  very  great  demonstrations  made 
towards  enforcing  the  law,  and  in  1865, 1  thought  if  it  was  possible  to  execute 
the  law,  I  should  like  to  see  it  done,  and  I  did  the  best  I  could,  with  the 
materials  I  had  to  do  with.  I  found  it  extremely  difficult,  from  the  reluctance 
of  our  police  to  execute  the  law.  I  think  that,  if  they  had  been  amenable  to 
the  chamber  at  the  other  end  of  the  house,  instead  of  being  amenable  to  the 
Board  of  Mayor  and  Aldermen,  the  law  could  have  been  executed  ? 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  aldermen  did  not  fully  sustain  you  there  ? 
Is  that  implied  ? 

A.  Well,  no,  I  would  not  say  that,  because  they  make  no  objection  ;  but  I 
wish  to  be  understood  as  saying  this :  The  appointments  are  made  by  the 
Mayor  and  Aldermen,  and  the  action  of  the  police,  and  particularly  of  the 
City  Marshal,  convinced  me  that  they  did  not  know  whose  hands  they  might 
fall  into  the  next  year. 


542  APPENDIX. 

Q.  The  joint  action  of  the  city  government  was  a  matter  in  their  minds  of 
some  uncertainty  ? 

A.  Yes.  In  1864  there  were,  I  think,  855  arrests  for  drunkenness,  the 
whole  number  of  arrests  being  something  over  1,500.  The  prosecutions  under 
the  liquor  law  were  26.  In  1865,  the  first  year  of  my  administration,  the 
prosecutions  were  65,  the  whole  number  of  arrests  about  the  same  as  in  1864, 
and  the  number  of  arrests  for  drunkenness  650  odd — about  200  less.  In  1866 
the  number  increased.  The  whole  number  of  arrests  increased.  I  think  the 
whole  number  arrested  for  drunkenness  was  about  800,  and  the  whole  number 
of  prosecutions  about  177.  Of  course  the  enforcement  of  this  law  depends,  to 
a  very  great  extent,  upon  public  sentiment.  My  own  opinion  is  that  the  reason 
the  law  is  disregarded,  to  a  great  extent,  is,  that  in  the  enforcement  of  it, 
both  by  our  local  police  (when  they  do  anything),  and  by  the  State  police, 
they  begin  at  the  wrong  end.  Our  population  in  Lowell  is  peculiar,  particu- 
larly those  who  are  engaged  in  the  liquor  traffic.  A  very  large  proportion  of 
them  are  foreigners.  Out  of  the  855  arrested  for  drunkenness  in  1865,  less 
than  300  were  Americans,  and  this  proportion  holds  good  in  the  division  of 
arrests  into  the  different  classes  of  crimes  for  which  persons  are  arrested. 
The  law,  I  think,  is  disregarded,  and  public  opinion  disregards  the  law,  from 
this  fact :  A  very  large  proportion  of  the  drunkards,  as  I  said,  are  foreigners, 
and  a  very  large  proportion  of  those  engaged  in  the  liquor  traffic  are  foreigners. 
There  are  some  Americans,  and  some  gentlemen  who  stand  otherwise  high  in 
the  community,  engaged  in  the  traffic — men  of  wealth  and  standing  ;  and  so 
long  as  these  men  of  wealth  and  standing  are  passed  by  and  are  not  disturbed, 
as  has  been  the  case  in  our  city,  of  course  the  lower  strata  of  the  community 
who  are  engaged  in  this  traffic  have  very  little  respect  for  any  such  law!  I 
think  another  matter  which  would  have  a  tendency  to  check  the  traffic 
materially  in  our  place,  would  be  to  put  a  stop  to  the  open  violation  of  the 
law  by  the  railroad  corporation.  Last  year  I  went  to  Mr.  Winslow,  Superin- 
tendent of  the  Boston  and  Lowell  road,  and  besought  him  to  abandon  the 
practice  of  transporting  liquor  over  the  road,  and  he  told  me  he  would  notify 
his  employes  to  that  effect.  A  few  days  subsequently,  I  received  a  notice 
which  he  said  he  had  sent  to  all  his  employes,  which  I  found,  on  looking  at 
the  date,  was  one  that  was  issued  in  1855,  when  the  law  was  revised.  That 
was  the  date  mine  bore,  and  I  suppose  that  all  the  employe's  had  that  notice. 

It  came  to  my  knowledge  that  in  1864  there  was  carried  into  the  city  of 
Lowell  a  quantity  of  ale  and  beer  sufficient  to  give  about  eight  gallons  to  each 
inhabitant  of  the  city,  to  say  nothing  of  other  kinds  of  liquor.  I  think  if  the 
Legislature  should  say  to  the  Boston  and  Lowell  road,  "  If  you  do  not  stop 
violating  this  law,  we  will  repeal  your  charter,"  they  would  stop  it.  I 
endeavored  to  try  the  thing  on  by  the  use  of  the  law.  I  had  a  warrant  made 
out,  and  took  it  to  our  police  judge  ;  but  he  said  it  was  a  very  large  corpor- 
ation, and  advised  me  to  go  to  the  Grand  Jury,  and  refused  to  prosecute 
under  it.  Perhaps  that  was  a  very  good  reason,  although  it  did  not  seem  to 
me  so  at  the  time.  Accordingly,  I  went  to  the  District-Attorney  of  our  dis- 
trict at  the  last  October  session,  but  I  could  not  get  the  case  taken  up  there.  I 
was  anxious  to  see  whether  the  corporation  was  stronger  than  the  Common- 
wealth, but  I  failed  to  get  an  opportunity  to  test  the  question.  I  think  if  our 


APPENDIX.  543 

State  Constabulary  were  to  commence  at  the  other  end  and  take  the  larger 
dealers,  the  law  could  be  enforced.  There  are  several  gentlemen  (I  will  not 
name  them  here,  because  it  is  unnecessary,)  who  are  largely  engaged  in  the  traffic 
in  Lowell.  They  supply  the  small  dealers.  There  are  a  great  many  Irish 
women  who  buy  perhaps  a  gallon  at  a  time  ;  about  as  much  money  as  they 
can  raise  at  a  time  is  enough  to  fill  a  jug,  and  when  that  is  gone,  it  is 
replenished  by  these  dealers.  If  these  dealers  were  stopped,  as  they  could  be 
stopped,  I  think  the  law  could  be  enforced  fully,  because  these  parties  cannot 
buy  in  larger  quantities ;  and,  more  particularly,  if  the  railroads  were 
prohibited  from  carrying  it  into  the  city,  it  would  be  still  more  difficult  to  get 
it.  I  think  the  law  has  had  a  good  effect  in  the  city  of  Lowell,  but  it  has  not 
had  so  good  an  effect  as  it  would  have  had,  if  earnest  men  had  been  willing 
to  execute  it. 

Q.     You  believe  in  the  practicability  of  executing  it  in  Lowell  ? 
A.     Certainly  I  do. 

Q.  Would  you  have  any  hesitation,  under  all  the  circumstances,  in  advis- 
ing the  preservation  of  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  Not  at  all.  I  should  regret  to  see  the  system  of  licensing  adopted  from 
this  fact :  I  believe  that,  with  the  evils  that  arise  from  the  sale  of  liquor,  it  is 
wrong ;  and  I  do  not  believe  in  the  State  licensing  anybody  to  do  wrong. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  ask  your  opinion  on  the  question  of  the  public  senti- 
ment of  Lowell,  or,  if  you  please,  of  your  Senatorial  District.  It  has  been 
urged  that  the  people  are  generally  opposed  to  the  law.  Do  you  see  any 
indications  that  that  is  the  public  sentiment  of  your  Senatorial  District  ? 

A.  My  opinion  is  that  the  public  sentiment  is  in  favor  of  the  law,  judging 
from  the  expressions  that  have  been  made.  I  know  of  men  who  have 
expressed  themselves  in  favor  of  the  law — men  who  are  in  the  habit  of  drink- 
ing occasionally.  They  would  like  to  see  it  enforced  as  a  matter  of  public 
good. 

Q.     Who  is  the  Senator  from  your  District  ? 
A.     Hon.  J.  N.  Marshall. 
Q.     A  resident  of  Lowell  ? 
A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Did  the  license  question  enter  into  the  canvass  in  any  way  ? 
A.     It  did,  somewhat.     There  were  various  questions  that  came  up.     We 
have  had  considerable  tronble  in  our  Senatorial  District.     If  a  man  is  put  up 
in  our  Senatorial  District,  it  is  considered  a  very  great  amusement  to  knock 
him  down.     There  was  a  portion  of  those  persons  who  favor  the  enactment 
of  a  license  law, — which,  so  far  as  my  knowledge  extends,  embraces  all  the 
liquor-dealers,  without  any  exception, — who  voted  for  another  candidate. 
Q.     Who  was  their  candidate  ? 
A.    Rev.  Mr.  Clark,  of  North  Chelmsford. 
Q.     The  man  who  is  here  urging  license  ? 
A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     The  liquor-dealers  to  a  man  supported  him  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  And  then  there  were,  perhaps,  some  other  objections  to 
Mr.  Marshall,  as  there  always  are  to  every  man  who  is  in  a  position  to  be 
voted  for,  which  operated  against  him.  There  was  a  vast  amount  of  work 


544  APPENDIX. 

done,  and  I  think  the  consequence  was  that  there  was  a  very  small  plurality 
for  Mr.  Marshall  in  Lowell.     Some  three  or  four  votes,  I  think. 

Q.    In  Lowell,  but  not  in  the  district,  as  a  whole  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SHERMAN.)  You  would  deem  it  fair  to  state  that  he  was 
the  regularly  nominated  candidate,  and  carried  a  great  many  votes  in  that 
way? 

A.     Oh,  yes,  he  had  the  strength  ef  the  party. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  But  it  is  a  fact  that  Mr.  Clark  was  deemed  the 
desirable  candidate  by  the  liquor-dealers  in  Lowell,  not  in  some  cases  only, 
but  generally  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  understand  it  to  be  their  feeling  or  opinion  that  his  measure 
would  repress  their  traffic  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say,  for  I  had  but  very  little  conversation,  except  on  general 
principles. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  know  what  the  vote  for  Mr.  Clark  was 
in  his  own  town  of  Chelmsford  ? 

A.  My  impression  is  that  there  was  a  vote  of  one  hundred  against  Mr. 
Clark. 

Q.     How  many  votes  are  cast  in  that  town  ? 

A.     Four  hundred,  I  think. 

Q.  Then  his  own  town  of  Chelmsford  did  not  feel  that  his  policy  would 
aid  the  temperance  cause  there  ? 

A.  It  would  seem  not,  from  that,  if  that  was  the  question  on  which  they 
voted. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Your  opinion  is  that  the  course  pursued  by  the  State 
Constabulary  in  arresting  the  lower  liquor-dealers  will  not  execute  the  law, — 
that  they  should  begin  at  the  other  end  ? 

A.     That  is  my  impression. 

Q.  You  tried  with  all  your  energy  to  execute  the  law,  as  far  as  you  were 
concerned,  as  mayor  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  I  gave  positive  orders, — printed  orders,  to  every  member  of 
our  police  force. 

Q.  Did  the  city  government  fail  to  do  anything  that  they  could  have 
done  ? 

A .  Yes,  sir.  If  it  had  been  practicable,  (I  do  not  think  it  was,  with  the 
city  government  constituted  as  it  was,)  I  would  have  turned  out  the  entire 
police  force,  and  tried  again. 

Q.    But  as  it  was  then  constituted,  you  did  all  you  could  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Taking  the  city  of  Lowell  as  it  is  now,  as  indicated  by  ycrur  last  elec- 
tion, should  you  suppose  that  you  could  get  a  majority  of  your  citizens  in 
favor  of  the  rigid  enforcement  of  the  present  law,  in  the  way  you  propose  ? 

A.  My  impression  is  that  we  could.  At  any  rate,  I  know  that  we  should 
get  a  very  large  proportion  of  those  who  are  considered  our  best  citizens. 
Of  course,  there  would  be  exceptions. 


APPENDIX.  545 

Q.  >  As  to  the  effect  of  your  attempt  to  enforce  the  law  during  the  two 
years  of  your  mayoralty,  were  you  able  perceptibly  to  check  intemperance  ? 

A.  Well,  the  first  year  I  was  in,  I  think  the  population  increased.  It  had 
increased  up  to  January,  1866,  something  over  5,000,  and  we  had  a  return  of 
a  portion  of  the  army  during  the  latter  part  of  1865,  which,  of  course,  had  a 
great  many  turbulent  spirits  in  it,  but  the  arrests  for  drunkenness  fell  off 
about  25  per  cent,  from  the  year  previous. 

Q.  Was  it  not  the  fact  in  1864,  that  the  population  of  Lowell  was  very 
much  reduced  from  what  it  was  before  the  war  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    The  mills  were  closed  very  extensively  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  1864,  was  not  the  population  less  by  five  or  six  thousand  than  the 
ordinary  population? 

A.  Yes,  sir.'  I  say  in  1864  the  arrests  for  drunkenness  were  855,  and  in 
1865,  under  the  pressure  of  the  enforcement  of  the  law,  they  were  reduced  to 
about  600. 

Q.     Had  the  population  fully  returned  in  1865  ? 

A.    It  had  at  the  close  of  1865. 

Q.    During  the  greater  part  of  the  year,  it  had  not  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  NAHUM  GALE. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  your  residence 
and  religious  connections  ? 

A .  I  reside  in  Lee,  Massachusetts,  and  have  been  a  member  of  the  Con- 
gregational Trinitarian  Church  in  Massachusetts  for  twenty-five  years. 

Q.    In  the  same  place  ? 

A .    No,  sir ;  thirteen  years  in  Lee.  I  was  in  Ware,  Massachusetts,  nine  years. 

Q.    What  is  your  distance  from  Pittsfield  ? 

A.     About  ten  miles. 

Q.  You  are  conversant  with  the  business  relations  between  your  place  and 
Pittsfield,  in  a  general  way  ? 

A.     Somewhat.     Our  place  is  on  the  railroad. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  what  views  you  may  entertain,  as  the 
result  of  your  observation,  touching  the  cause  of  temperance,  especially  as 
connected  with  the  question  of  prohibition  or  license  ? 

A.  I  am  personally  in  favor  of  the  present  law  in  preference  to  a  license 
law.  I  have  been  engaged  in  the  temperance  cause  more  or  less  ever  since  I 
was  sixteen  years  of  age.  I  signed  the  pledge  soon  after  that,  and  have 
always  practised  total  abstinence  through  all  my  course  since  that  time.  In 
1842  I  preached  in  Hampshire  County.  We  were  under  a  license  law,  I  think, 
then,  and  there  was  a  discussion  in  relation  to  temperance,  and  a  great  reform 
from  what  there  was  in  my  boyhood.  Afterwards,  I  advocated  the  present 
law,  though  I  have  never  dealt  very  much  with  law.  I  have  confined  myself 
mostly  to  preaching  as  a  minister  on  the  subject,  and  have  delivered  addresses. 
I  have  confined  my  own  personal  efforts  more  to  the  moral  influences  than 
to  the  law.  I  have  left  that  to  others,  who  were  not  of  my  profession. 
69 


546  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Did  you  feel,  at  this  time,  that  you  experienced  any  inconvenience 
from  the  existence  of  the  law  ?  Did  you  deem  it  a  bar  to  your  efforts  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  have  never  felt  that.  I  think  there  was  a  time  when  there 
was  an  undue  reliance  upon  the  law,  and  there  was  a  feeling  that  the  work 
would  be  more  summarily  accomplished  than  by  the  long  process  of  moral 
effort.  I  think  that  was  temporary.  I  never  ceased  to  preach  total  absti- 
nence, independently  of  any  law  on  the  subject,  and  found  no  difficulty  in  the 
way ;  and  never  found  any  in  Berkshire  County,  where  I  have  preached  the 
same  doctrines. 

Q.  And  your  people  have  always  heard  you  ?  They  have  made  no 
complaint  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  have  never  consulted  them,  but  have  preached  on  the 
subject  whenever  I  have  felt  called  upon  to  do  so.  ' 

Q.  You  have  never  heard  that  the  ears  or  the  hearts  of  your  people  were 
turned  from  your  pleadings,  because  of  the  law  ? 

A.     No,  sir;  I  do  not  think  they  have  been. 

Q.  What  is  your  judgment  of  the  state  of  the  temperance  cause  ? 
Taking  your  own  immediate  social  circles,  has  it  deteriorated  or  has  it 
advanced  of  late  years  ? 

A.  I  don't  think  it  has  deteriorated  at  all,  since  my  connection  with  our 
people.  We  have  a  large  foreign  population.  Our  population  is  between 
four  and  five  thousand,  and  a  large  portion  of  it  is  foreign,  over  whom,  of 
course,  we  have  no  influence.  But  among  the  various  Protestant  denomina- 
tions in  the  town,  and  the  people  who  attend  those  churches,  I  do  not  think 
there  has  been  any  retrogadc  movement.  My  impression  is,  that  since  the 
war,  there  has  been  an  advance ;  that  temperance  has  improved.  There  is 
less  drinking,  I  think,  in  Lee  now  than  there  was  three  or  four  years  ago ; 
and  there  have  been  times  when  the  present  law  seemed  to  shut  up  the  houses. 
The  sale  lias  not  been  so  open  any  time  during  these  thirteen  years.  The 
present  law  has  seemed  to  be  effectual,  when  it  was  in  good  hands.  Our 
present  State  Constable  has  done  considerable  lately,  and  is  disposed  to  do,  so 
far  as  he  can  get  evidence.  He  is,  I  think,  vigilant,  and  I  think  there  is  an 
apprehension  on  the  part  of  those  who  sell  secretly,  that  they  will  be  obliged 
to  stop.  They  have  been  prosecuted  recently,  as  far  as  evidence  could  be 
obtained.  It  is  very  difficult,  in  many  cases,  I  am  told  by  the  State  Constable, 
to  get  evidence.  I  am  inclined  to  think  that  within  two  years,  perhaps,  the 
cause  of  temperance  has  improved  in  our  place. 

Q.  In  general,  what  is  the  attitude  of  the  best  friends  of  the  temperance 
cause,  whom  you  know,  in  relation  to  prohibition  ? 

A.  I  think,  sir,  they  are  in  favor  of  the  present  law.  So  far  as  the  clergy- 
men of  the  various  denominations  are  concerned,  I  have  conversed  with  but 
one  man  who  has  expressed  himself  favorable  to  a  license  law,  and  I  do  not 
think  he  was  very  strenuous.  I  saw  him  in  the  cars,  and  he  expressed  some 
views  a  little  different  from  mine.  The  clergymen  of  all  denominations  with 
whom  I  have  been  familiar  for  thirteen  years,  sustain  the  present  law  very 
decidedly. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  the  public  ever  could  acquiesce  in  a  license  law 
that  should  throw  open  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors  to  hotel-keepers  imi- 


APPENDIX.  547 

versally,  and  apothecaries,  grocers,  and  victuallers ;  with  all  restraints  on  the 
sale  of  smaller  liquors  removed,  and  with  all  restraint  removed  from  the 
wholesale  trade  ?  In  your  opinion,  would  a  license  law  of  that  character, 
with  no  penalties  indicated  at  present,  be  acceptable  to  the  temperance 
friends  ? 

A..  I  do  not  think  it  would  be  to  any  considerable  number  of  those  with 
whom  I  am  acquainted.  I  have  lived  for  thirteen  years  next  door  to  the  pub- 
lic house,  which  has  recently  been  consumed.  The  church  stands  between  my 
house,  which  is  the- parsonage,  and  this  public  house,  and  I  have  never  experi- 
enced any  inconvenience  arising  from  disorder  in  that  house.  There  has 
never  been  any  open  sale  of  liquor  in  the  house.  I  do  not  know  that  there 
has  ever  been  any  clandestine  sale.  I  should  be  very  sorry  to  have  another 
house  opened  there  with  a  bar ;  it  would  seemi  to  me  too  near  the  church, 
altogether,  and  too  near  the  people  who  live  in  the  town; 

Q.    You  would  deem  it  a  calamity  to  the  church  itself? 

A.    I  should,  decidedly,  to  have  anything  of  that  kind! 

Q.  Have  you.  ever  known,  a  liquor-shop  next  door  to  a  church  that  affected! 
it  favorably  ? 

A.  I  have  never  known  one  next  door  to  a  church ;  but",  speaking  on  gen- 
eral principles,  I  do  not  believe  its  influence  would  be  favorable.  I  believe 
there  would  be  disorders  there  incongruous  with  the  sacred  place. 

Q.  If  you  were  desirous  of  restraining  the  traffic,  yom  would  not  throw 
around  it  the  protection  of  law  ? 

A.  No,  sir:  I  took  the  same  view  of  it  in  tKe  times  of  license,  when  Twas 
a  boyj  and  liquor  was  sold  very  freely:  I  am  sorry  to  say  that  when  a 
youth,  I  was  employed  in  a  store,  and  drew  an  immense  quantity  of  liquor. 
I  think  men  were  licensed  then  who  were  "  of  good  moral  character,"  and  as 
many  as  "  the  public  good  required."  I  should  be  very  sorry  to  have  any  such 
terms  used  to-day.  I  should  regard  it  as  very  deleterious,  especially  on  the 
young,  to  have  selectmen  license  men  of  "  good  moral  character  "  to  deal  out 
this  drink  as  a  beverage.  I  think  I  expressed  the  opinion,  as  a  boy,  when  I 
first  began  to  have  temperance  ideas,  that  it  was  entirely  inconsistent  for  the 
town  authorities  to  license  anybody  to  sell  liquor ;  and  the  County  Commis- 
sioners refused  for  many  years  to  grant  licenses.  That  was  the  case  in  Ware 
for  some  time.  The  town,  was  opposed  to  having  anybody  recommended  for 
that  business. 

Q.  Do  you  find  anything  in  human  nature  that  is  so  thoroughly  averse  to 
the  State  enacting  and  executing  laws  based  on.  the  truth  as  is  intimated  in 
this  neighborhood  ? 

A.  I  don't  think  there  is  the  same  opposition  in.  Berkshire,  by  any  means. 
There  is  a  general  acquiescence  in  the  law. 

Q.    Your  first  men,  your  leading  men,  are  generally  law-abiding  men? 

A.  Yes,  sir:  It  never  has  been  very  much  a  question  with  us.  I  don't 
know  that  it  has  entered  into  our  elections  of  representatives  at  all. 

Q.     That  is,  all  parties  take  that  for  granted  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  think  we  have  never  sent  a  man  to  the  General  Court  who 
was  not  in  favor  of  the  law. 

Q.    Who  represents  you  now  ? 


648  APPENDIX. 

A.    Mr.  Branning. 

Q.    Is  he  a  temperance  man;  openly  ? 

A.     Oh,  certainly.     It  has  never  been  a  question1  with  us. 

Q.  What  should  you  say,  generally,  with  regard  to  the  question  of  the 
increase  in  the  drinking  usages  of  society,  under  ministrations  that  favor 
moderate  drinking,  as  compared  with  the  state  of  things  under  ministrations 
favoring  and  pleading  for  total  abstinence  ? 

A.  Since  the  time  I  speak  of,  I  'have  always  lived  under  those  who  have 
preached  total  abstinence ;  I  have  always  taught  it  myself,  and  I  have  never 
known  any  clergyman  near  me  who  has  preached  any  other  doctrine. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  or  not  the  predominating  influences  in  Pittsfield 
are  similar  to  those  in  your  own  town  ? 

A.     I  am  very  little  acquainted  there. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  wine-bibbing  has  been  as  strongly  discounte- 
nanced in  the  church  of  your  denomination  in  Pittsfield  as  it  has  been  in  your 
own  church?' 

A.     There  is  very  little  in  my  own  church.- 

Q.    Is  there  a  great  deal  in  Pittsfield  ? 

A.  Pittsfield  has  the  reputation  of  having  a  good  deal  of  intemperance.  I 
don't  know  whether  there  is  more  or  less  there  than  in  other  towns  as  large 
as  that.  Our  town  is  only  about  half  as  large  as  Pittsfield. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Before  the  enactment  of  the  prohibitory  law,  was 
there  any  public  sale  in  Lee  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  think  not.  I  think  I  never  have  seen  a  decanter  in  any 
store  or  shop. 

Q.  Have  you  seen  any  change  in  Lee,  in  outward  appearances,  so  far  as 
regards  the  sale  of  liquor,  since  the  enactment  of  the  prohibitory  law,  from 
what  it  was  before  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  think  that,  practically,  it  has  been  prohibitory  law  ever 
since  I  have  resided  in  the  town. 

Q.     There  has  been  no  particular  change  by  the  law  ? 

A.     I  have  resided  there  but  thirteen  years.     I  resided  in  Ware  formerly. 

Q.  You  don't  suppose  there  has  been  any  particular  change  in  Lee,  or  in 
the  towns  around  you,  since  the  passage  of  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  think  not.  Since  licenses  were  withheld,  I  don't  know 
that  there  has  been  any  change. 

Q.  Has  there  been  any  particular  benefit  experienced  from  this  prohibitory 
law  in  your  neighborhood  beyond  what  was  experienced  under  the  law  as  it 
existed  before  the  enactment  of  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.    I  don't  know,  sir.     Not  having  been  there,  I  cannot  testify  as  to  that. 

Q-    What  is  your  impression  ? 

A.  My  impression  is,  that  for  a  long  time  there  has  been  no  open  sale  of 
liquor  in  Lee.  It  has  been  sold  contrary  to  law.  • 

Q.    Kespectable  people  have  given  up  the  use  of  it  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir,  that  is  the  case. 

Q.     There  are,  I  suppose,  some  secret  sales,  and  always  have  been  ? 

A.  There  is  no  doubt  there  are  secret  sales.  There  has  been  no  time 
since  I  have  been  there  when  there  have  not  been  secret  sales.  Heretofore, 
in  that  region,  the  temperance  movement  has  been  very  thorough. 


APPENDIX.  549 

Q.  Do  your  people  get  their  liquor  for  medicine  at  the  State  Agency,  or 
elsewhere.? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  If  I  have  occasion  to  buy  anything,  I  go  to  the 
State  Agency. 

Q.     Do  you  know  whether  the  druggists  furnish  it  ? 

A.  I  believe  the  druggist  is  the  State  Agent.  I  have  always  obtained  it 
from  him.  I  have  had  very  little  sickness,  and  very  little  occasion  to  buy 
anything. 

Q.  The  proposition  of  these  petitioners  is  to  leave  the  present  prohibitory 
law,  with  all  its  penalties  and  all  its  provisions  in  force,  in  all  such  towns  as 
shall  decide  not  to  have  liquor  sold.  Would  such  a  law  as  that  be  any  incon- 
venience in  Lee  ?  Your  people  would  not  vote  to  license  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  I  should  not  be  willing  to  say  that.  I  do  not  know 
how  they  would  vote.  I  do  not  know  that  that  question  ever  came  up. 

Q.     They  accomplished  that  before  by  their  own  action  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know,  sir.     I  presume  so.     I  was  not  there. 

Q.  You  perceive  that  the  enforcement  of  this  law  may  be  a  very  different 
question  in  a  town  like  Lee  and  in  the  city  of  Boston  ? 

A.  I  have  no  acquaintance  in  Boston.  I  do  not  suppose  there  is  any 
difficulty  with  us,  and  the  towns  around,  except  the  general  strong  appetites 
and  depravity  in  a  certain  class  of  men.  No  respectable  men  deal  in  it  in 
our  vicinity. 

Q.  And  you  have  no  idea  that  if  it  lay  with  the  people  of  the  town,  any- 
body would  be  permitted  to  deal  in  it  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know.    I  do  not  know  what  changes  might  take  place. 

Q.  It  could  not  be  done  unless  the  respectable  people  of  your  town  have 
changed  their  opinion  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know.  I  do  not  suppose  it  could.  That  is  my  impression.  I 
would  not  say.  I  think  the  great  body  of  respectable  people  are  opposed  to 
having  any  more  liquor  sold  there. 

Q.     That  great  body  constitutes  the  majority  of  your  people  ? 

A.  We  have  a  very  large  number  who  would  not  be  in  sympathy  with  us. 
I  cannot  tell,  if  they  should  be  marshalled  on  that  question,  how  it  would  be 
decided. 

Q,.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)    You  refer  to  the  foreign  population  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER).     Lee  is  a  manufacturing  place  ? 
'  A.     Yes,  sir;  there  are  marble  quarries,  factories,  paper-mills,  &c., there. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  say  you  have  had  a  prohibitory  law  there, 
practically,  for  a  great  many  years  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  and  we  had  a  prohibitory  law  when  I  was  in -Hampshire 
County.  We  chose  County  Commissioners  who  would  not  grant  licenses. 

Q.  Suppose  you  should  refuse  to  grant  licenses,  how  would  you  like  it  to 
have  Pittsfield  give  licenses,  and  have  the  liquor-sellers  send  their  bottles  and 
jugs  into  your  town  ? 

A.     We  should  not  like  it  at  all. 

Adjourned. 


550  APPENDIX. 


SIXTEENTH    DAY. 

TUESDAY,  March  19th,  1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  the  hearing  of  testimony  on 
behalf  of  the  Remonstrants  was  continued. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  NATHAN  CROSBY. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  reside  in  Lowell,  I  believe  ? 

A.    Yes,  I  do,  sir. 

Q.     You  are  a  judge  of  the  Police  Court,  I  believe  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  so  ? 

A.     Over  twenty  years. 

Q.  Previous  to  that,  I  believe  you  were,  for  a  number  of  years,  engaged 
as  agent  for  one  or  more  temperance  societies  in  this  State  ? 

A.     I  was  agent  of  the  Massachusetts  Temperance  Union  for  several  years. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  have  you  give  the  result  of  your  observation  of  the  ope- 
rations of  the  prohibitory  law  and  of  license  laws,  and  your  opinion  of  their 
relative  value,  and  anything  in  your  experience  and  observation  which  you 
think  would  be  valuable  in  connection  with  this  question. 

A.  When  I  went  into  the  temperance  enterprise,  I  went  into  it  more  for 
the  purpose  of  passing  through  the  Commonwealth  as  a  lawyer,  than  as  a  mere 
temperance  agent,  to  show  the  constitutional  propriety  of  the  law  of  1838 — 
what  was  called  the  fifteen-gallon  law — to  settle  the  question,  so  far  as  I  could? 
upon  the  public  ear,  that  that  law  was  not  oppressive,  but  was  constitutional 
and  proper.  I  had  been  interested  in  the  subject  of  temperance  ever  since  I 
came  into  the  Commonwealth,  which  was  in  1826.  •  That  was  soon  after  a 
few  men  had  made  the  subject  of  temperance  popular,  or  at  any  rate,  had 
awakened  the  mind  of  the  community  to  it.  Dr.  Edwards  and  Dr.  Hewitt 
had  then  been  in  the  field  two  or  three  years  ;  and  I  had  met  Dr.  Kittredge, 
a  somewhat  famous  man  in  the  temperance  enterprise,  at  the  court  in  Grafton 
County,  and,  having  known  his  reputation  as  a  man  reclaimed  from  intemper- 
ance, I  fell  in  his  way,  and  become  interested  enough  in  the  temperance 
cause  to  go  into  it ;  and  I  took  the  pledge  then  against  the  use  of  ardent 
spirits.  But  the  first  eifort  which  I  now  remember  to  have  made,  or  to  have 
aided  the  public  in  making,  was  in  Essex  County,  in  perhaps  1827  or  '28, 
when  our  effort  was  to  regulate  the  licensed  sale  of  liquor,  so  far  as  we  could, 
by  choosing  the  men  who  should  be  licensed.  There  were  so  few  taverners  at 
that  time  that  we  could  not  make  much  choice  then  from  them.  They  owned 
or  leased  their  places, — there  were  but  one  or  two  in  a  town, — and  so  the 
choice  was  limited  to  selecting,  so  far  as  we  could,  those  grocers  who  would 
make  the  best  use  of  their  licenses, — those  in  whom  we  could  have  the  greatest 
confidence ;  and  I  recollect  that  in  Essex  County  our  operations  before  the 
County  Commissioners  were  restricted  to  resisting  certain  persons  who  applied 
for  licenses,  and  waiving  objections  to  certain  other  persons.  About  that  time 


APPENDIX.  551 

we  commenced  procuring  indictments  against  those  who  were  not  licensed. 
We  had  a  large  number  of  these  indictments  in  Essex  County,  under  Judge 
Minot,  then  prosecuting  attorney.  I  remember  being  interested  in  those  pros- 
ecutions. The  first  point  which  I  wanted  to  submit  to  the  committee  upon 
that  was.  this  :  that  we  endeavored  then  to  make  the  best  of  the  license  law,  by 
selecting  the  men  who  should  be  licensed.  Applicants  for  a  license  were  then 
required  to  show  the  County  Commissioners  that  they  were  men  of  good 
moral  character,  and  various  things  of  that  kind;  and  we  held  them  to  that- 
If  we  could  attack  a  man  on  the  ground  of  his  immorality  or  of  his  bad  influ- 
ence in  the  community,  we  did  so,  and  regulated  the  sale,  so  far  as  we  could, 
in  that  way. 

It  run  on  in  that  way, — restraining  the  sale  by  selecting  the  men, — until 
the  temperance  enterprise  had  so  engrossed  the  public  mind,  that  the  law  of 
1838  was  passed.  That  is  the  next  point  I  have ;  for  I  have  not  looked  over 
any  documents ;  I  speak  only  from  recollection,  and  from  a  gathering  up  of 
the  facts  as  I  came  along  on  the  railroad.  That  law  of  1838  was  a  prohibi- 
tion up  to  fifteen  gallons ;  and,  as  the  Committee  know,  it  was  familiarly  called 
the  "  fifteen-gallon  jug,"  and  a  great  deal  of  fun  was  made  of  it.  That  was 
followed  by  the  "  striped-pig,"  and  dumb-waiters  at  the  bars  of  hotels,  where 
a  little  table  swung  round  and  you  could  get  your  liquor,  but  could  not  see 
who  sold  it  to  you,  and  therefore  you  could  not  testify  against  anybody.  It 
will  be  remembered  that  that  law  was  resisted  because  it  was  said  to  be 
oppressive  of  the  poor  and  the  men  of  small  means,  who  could  not  buy  fifteen 
gallons  at  a  time,  while  men  of  wealth  and  standing  could.  We  met  that  as 
well  as  we  could,  although  we  found  it  was  not  the  poor  men  who  applied  for 
the  repeal  of  that  law,  but  gentlemen  like  Mr.  Otis.  For  two  years,  that 
great  resistance  to  the  law  of  1 838  was  called  "  the  petition  of  Harrison  Gray 
Otis  and  others."  They  were  men  in  rather  high  standing, — a  great  many  of 
them  retired  men, — men  of  means,  and  men  who  never  felt  that  that  law  was 
oppressive  to,  or  touched  them  at  all.  But  they  were  in  the  field  resisting 
that  law.  At  the  end  of  two  years  that  law  was  repealed. 

At  that  time,  I  came  into  the  enterprise  publicly.  We  then  thought  we 
would  make  the  best  of  the  license  law,  which  was  restored  by  the  repeal  of 
the  other.  Our  first  step  was  to  induce  the  County  Commissioners  to  with- 
hold licenses  ;  and  whenever  we  could  induce  them  to  do  that,  it  was  practi- 
cally a  prohibitory  law.  After  we  had  discussed  that  matter  in  the  public 
journals  for  sometime,  I  passed  rapidly  through  the  Commonwealth,  attend- 
ing the  meetings  of  the  County  Commissioners,  and  in  1841  or  '42,  (I  cannot 
now  say  which  year  it  was,)  we  had  been  so  successful,  that  I  think  in  the 
whole  Commonwealth  there  were  no  licensed  sales,  except  in  Boston,  and  pos- 
sibly Salem,  one  year.  All  the  County  Commissioners  in  the  Commomvealth 
withheld  licenses ;  but  the  cities  were  authorized,  under  the  law,  to  grant 
licenses,  and  I  believe  licenses  were  granted  in  Boston,  and  I  think,  one  year 
in  Salem;  although,  one  year  or  more  there  were  no  licenses  granted  in 
Boston  by  the  city  authorities.  The  great  effort  then  was,  to  have  practically 
a  prohibitory  law  under  the  license  law.  To  enable  us  to  carry  that  strong 
in  the  public  mind,  we  originated  the  "  Cold  Water  Army,"  addressing  the 
schools,  and  getting  the  children  out  for  exhibitions  and  celebrations,  under 


552  APPENDIX. 

the  terra  "  Cold  Water  Army,"  with  banners,  songs,  and  everything  of  that 
kind. 

There  followed  upon  that  enterprise  the  reformed  drunkards ;  and  it  has 
seemed  to  me,  in  the  history  of  this  great  enterprise,  that  whenever  we  got 
upon  the  law  somewhat  strong,  there  was  a  corresponding  interest  in  moral 
influences,  and  some  moral  power  came  in  to  lead  the  advocates  of  the  law  to 
suppose  that  the  thing  might  be  accomplished  without  pressing  the  law  so 
hard ;  and,  therefore,  when  the  reformed  drunkards  came,  they  created  a 
tornado  of  public  feeling  against  drinking  and  against  the  desolations  of 
drunkenness,  so  that  all  the  people  of  the  Commonwealth  raised  their  hands  and 
said,  "  We  have  got  it  now.  Now  there  will  be  an  end  to  this  matter.  There 
will  be  no  more  sales.  Nobody  will  want  to  drink  now.  We  see  the  desola- 
tions of  drunkenness ;  we  see  that  men  can  be  reformed."  There  never 
was,  perhaps,  such  a  public  sentiment  created  upon  any  one  topic,  which  run 
so  like  a,  furor  through  the  Commonwealth,  as  that  created  by  the  reformed 
drunkards.  Of  course,  men  stood  back ;  prosecutions  under  the  law  were 
temporarily  suspended.  However,  that  enterprise,  like  all  others  which  arouse 
the  community,  flagged  after  a  while,  there  being  no  such  thing,  somehow,  as 
keeping  an  excitement  in  the  community  up  to  a  high  point  any  great  length 
of  time.  At  last  it  subsided,  the  enterprise  went  rather  into  discredit,  and 
then  its  friends  seemed  to  look  around  to  see  what  was  to  be  done ;  and  in  my 
knowledge  of  the  history  of  the  enterprise,  there  has  been  no  time  when  its 
friends  were  not  moving  in  the  direction  of  legal  restraints,  and  enforcing  the 
law  in  some  form.  At  times  we  had  an  enforcement  of  the  law  very  fully. 
The  laws  have  been  changed  from  time  to  time.  I  do  not  propose  to  rehearse 
them,  or  call  them  up  particularly ;  but  we  have  always  had  more  or  less 
prosecutions  in  my  court  and  in  other  courts  through  the  Commonwealth,  in 
one  form  or  another;  but  whenever  we  seized  upon  the  vendors  of  intoxicating 
drinks,  under  any  law,  we  would  find  resistance,  and  the  cases  would  go  from 
one  court  to  another,  up  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  at  last, 
and  the  doubt  in  the  public  mind  with  regard  to  the  law  would  always  lead 
to  a  suspension  of  the  prosecutions,  to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  until  we  could 
arrive  at  results,  because  we  found  that  the  prosecuting  attorneys  and  even 
the  courts  of  the  Commonwealth,  however  well  disposed  to  enforce  the  law, 
were  not  disposed  to  go  on  accumulating  a  great  mass  of  prosecutions  and 
hold  them  in  suspense,  waiting  the  ultimate  decision.  Therefore,  while  they 
would  accumulate,  they  would  lie  and  wait  for  a  decision ;  and  these  decisions 
have  resulted  variously,  although  generally  they  have  been  in  favor  of  our 
propositions.  I  know  that  one  time  after  the  prohibitory  law  was  passed,  and 
under  one  of  the  provisions  of  the  law,  parties  assumed  .to  regard  spirituous 
liquors  and  intoxicating  liquors  as  out  of  the  protection  of  law  by  the  prohibi- 
tion, and  undertook  to  destroy  them.  Prosecutions  were  then  suspended  for 
a  time,  waiting  for  the  final  result,  because  Judge  Shaw,  at  the  nisi  prius  trial, 
ruled  the  thing  as  legal ;  but  after  a  while  the  full  court  overruled  that 
decision.  I  merely  allude  to  this,  if  the  Committee  please,  for  the  purpose  of 
showing,  that  while  we  have  been  diligent  in  instituting  proceedings,  from 
time  to  time,  in  the  courts,  we  have  been  'delayed  and  kept  at  bay  by  the 
uncertainty  of  the  final  result  in  the  courts  ;  and  whenever  those  cases  were 


APPENDIX.  553 

hung  up,  we  fell  "back  more  upon  the  moral  power  of  the  community.  I 
believe  myself,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  the  temperance  men  have  been  honest 
men,  fearless  men,  determined  men,  in  their  efforts  to  protect  the  community 
from  the  ravages  of  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquor,  and  that  they  have  dili- 
gently pursued  legal  resistance  as  far  and  as  fast,  ordinarily,  as  they  could 
consistently  with  the  public  mind,  and  with  getting  men  to  work  in  a  combined 
form ;  so  that  while  we  have  delayed  sometimes  in  legal  enforcements,  we 
have  had  other  operations  almost  always  in  the  field. 

When  the  "  Cold  Water  Army  "  had  passed  away,  and  its  influence,  and 
the  influence  of  the  reformed  drunkards, — (and  there  was  a  striking  fact 
again :  that  when  the  "  Cold  Water  Army  "  had  possession  of  the  Common- 
wealth, the  reformed  drunkards  came  in,  and  the  "Cold  Water  Army" 
retired,  simply  because  the  community  could  not  sustain  two  such  enterprises, 
based  on  the  creation  of  public  excitement,  systematically) — I  say,  when  these 
had  passed  away,  "  Bands  of  Hope  "  were  established  among  the  children,  and 
the  effort  was  made  to  create  a  fresh  current  in  that  quarter,  so  as  to  educate 
them  right.  But  I  would  now  refer  to  another  exhibition  of  moral  power,  in 
the  establishment  of  the  "  llechabites  "  and  "  Sons  of  Temperance,"  and  all 
the  organizations  of  that  kind  which  have  been  started  through  the  Com- 
monwealth. And  I  wish  to  remind  the  Committee,  too,  that  when  any  such 
effort  comes  up,  there  are  always  certain  men  (for  it  is  difficult  to  have  men 
think  alike)  who  will  not  go  into  it ;  who  stand  aloof ;  they  prefer  the  old 
way,  or  some  other  way.  There  are  a  great  many  of  the  old  temperance  men 
still  in  the  field,  who  took  the  old  pledges  and  worked  under  the  old  organiza- 
tion, who  did  not  sympathize  particularly  with  the  "  Cold  Water  Army,"  or 
the  reformed  drunkards.  Although  a  great  many  clergymen  admitted  the 
reformed  drunkards  into  their  pulpits  and  congregations,  others  were  not  dis- 
posed to  do  so.  You  cannot  bring  masses  of  men  into  one  channel  of  influ- 
ence, and  then  carry  all  of  them  into  another  channel, — some  will  linger 
behind  ;  they  will  not  all  go  together.  But  these  men  have  retired,  so  as  not 
to  keep  up  distinct  organizations,  and  thus  appear  to  counteract  the  influence 
of  others.  Hence  a  great  many  temperance  men  of  the  old  stamp  have 
stayed  at  home  quietly,  bidding  the  Rcchabites  and  all  these  associations  God- 
speed, letting  them  run,  and  aiding  them  with  their  sympathy,  £c. ;  and  they 
have  had  possession  of  the  field  for  some  time. 

It  has  also  been  somewhat  striking,  that  once  in  a  while  a  provision  of  law 
would  be  made  by  the  Legislature  which  would  repeal  former  statute  provis- 
ions. I  think  that  two  or  three  times,  within  my  recollection  of  the  history  of 
this  matter,  there  has  been  an  enactment  which  has  swept  from  the  docket  a 
great  many  cases  which  were  hanging  there,  waiting  for  the  ultimate  decision 
which  would  twine  the  rope,  if  I  may  so  say,  around  the  trade,  after  an  enact- 
ment had  been  made.  I  call  to  mind  now,  Mr.  Chairman,  as  evidence  that 
the  temperance  men  have  been  disposed  to  enforce  the  restraining  laws,  that 
a  little  change  was  made  a  year  or  two  ago  in  the  law,  by  which  we  lost  some 
1,700  or  2,000  cases  in  the  Commonwealth  which  were  hanging  in  the  courts, 
and  which  allowed  all  those  men  to  escape  the  penalty  of  the  law.  The  very 
existence  of  so  many  cases  pending  goes  to  show  that  the  temperance  men 
were  disposed  to  do  as  well  in  regard  to  the  enforcement  of  the  law  as  they 
70 


554  APPENDIX. 

rationally  could.  As  far  as  I  can  now  look  back,  and  call  to  mind  the  history 
of  legal  and  moral  proceedings,  the  temperance  men  have  not  slumbered  nor 
slept  in  the  Commonwealth,  but  have  only,  from  time  to  time,  changed  hands, 
and  have  been,  on  the  whole,  quite  diligent  for  thirty  or  forty  years.  It  is 
now  about  forty  years — perhaps  precisely  forty  years — since  we  first  resisted 
the  granting  of  licenses  to  certain  men  in  Essex  County,  and  thence  through 
the  Commonwealth ;  and  from  that  time  down,  I  contend  that  we  have  done 
substantially  what  we  could,  and  as  fast  as  we  could,  under  the  law,  as  well  as 
in  the  use  of  moral  means,  to  advance  the  cause  of  temperance.  It  is  to  be 
taken  into  account  that  we  have  always  been  resisted,  and  when  the  pinch  has 
come,  somehow  or  other, — I  do  not  know  how,  because  I  am  never  behind 
those  curtains, — retired  men  in  the  Commonwealth  have  been  brought  out  to 
stand  forth  prominently,  as  if  the  world  was  likely  to  come  to  an  end  by 
pressing  this  matter  too  hard. 

Q.  Has  it  not  been  the  persistent  purpose  of  the  friends  of  temperance 
always  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  liquor,  as  far  as  public  opinion  would  sustain 
them  in  it  ?' 

A.  I  believe — and  I  think  I  have  had  a  pretty  fair  experience  upon  it  for 
forty  years — that  they  have  always  been  inclined  to  make  the  best  of  the  law 
they  had,  and  to  get  the  best  law  they  could. 

Q.     And  to  get  stronger  ones  as  fast  as  they  could  ? 

A.  To  get  stronger  ones  as  fast  as  they  could,  and  then  enforce  them. 
Now,  we  have  another  little  matter  of  history  about  this  prohibitory  law. 
We  were  beginning  to  enforce  it  in  the  courts  and  elsewhere  when  the  war 
came  on.  Well,  the  war  has  thrown  us  back  three  or  four  years  in  that  mat- 
ter. We  all  felt  that  patriotism  was  the  first  thing,  and  that  it  was  not  worth 
while  to  distract  the  community  or  trouble  anybody  by  outside  issues.  All 
these  matters  were  quietly  suspended  until  the  question  of  license  came  up — 
what  effect  the  United  States  license  would  have  ?  We  had  prohibition,  and 
the  great  question,  the  interesting  question  was,  whether  the  granting  of 
licenses  under  the  United  States  Revenue  Act  would  authorize  the  sale  in 
this  Commonwealth  ?  That  question  was  raised ;  it  could  not  be  settled  in  a 
minute ;  it  must  take  a  year  or  two.  Finally  it  was  settled.  Then  the 
question  came  up  whether,  if  certain  property  was  taxed,  it  did  not  give  leave 
to  use  it,  in  any  way  ?  Some  such  question  arose — I  do  not  remember  the 
precise  form  it  took — that  went  up,  and  that  is  settled.  I  think  now,  Mr. 
Chairman,  that  with  the  prohibitory  law,  with  the  experience  of  the  past  forty 
years  in  the  enforcement  of  law,  and  in  the  operation  of  the  various  machinery 
to  bring  moral  power  to  bear  upon  the  community,  we  are  ready  in  this  Com- 
monwealth— and  I  see  signs  of  it  in  other  States — to  bind  all  the  scattered 
powers  and  forces  of  the  temperance  enterprise — Rechabites,  Sons  of  Tem- 
perance, Cold  Water  Army  and  reformed  drunkards — all  the  hosts  that  have 
been  heretofore  scattered,  more  or  less,  in  their  power  and  influence — we  are 
ready  now,  I  say,  with  the  decision  of  the  Court  apparently  in  our  favor,  to 
bind  all  these  scattered  forces  together.  I  understand  that  as  we  proceed, 
other  legal  questions  are  likely  to  come  up,  but  those  questions  are  limited, 
covering  only  a  portion  of  the  ground — as  to  the  destruction  of  the  liquor,  and 
certain  proceedings  in  cases  of  seizure ;  but  substantially,  the  legal  field  has 


APPENDIX.  555 

been  surveyed  and  settled,  and  now  we  Lave  only  to  rally  the  temperance 
power  of  this  Commonwealth  to  enforce  the  law,  and  I  think  we  have  the 
traffic  under  our  feet.  I  have  no  doubt  of  resistance ;  I  have  no  doubt  of 
sales ;  I  have  no  doubt  that  that  crime,  like  other  crimes  in  the  community, 
will  exist,  and  that  a  great  many  men  will  be  found  to  sell  liquor — not, 
perhaps,  publicly,  openly,  but  privately,  quietly,  secretly. 

I  have  one  word  which  I  want  to  say,  because  I  have  been  some  little 
troubled  in  my  own  mind,  as  I  have  looked  at  the  evidence  before  this  Com- 
mittee in  regard  to  liquors  ;  there  has  been  an  attack  made  upon  the  liquor 
which  has  been  sold  by  the  State  agents.  I  do  not  know  but  it  is  right 
enough ;  I  do  not  know  but  they  get  the  best  they  can  find.  But  my  doctrine 
is,  that  there  is  not  any  that  is  good.  My  notion  is,  that  there  is  no  true 
standard  of  liquor,  and  no  true  liquor — what  is  understood  in  the  common 
parlance  of  the  day  as  true  liquor ;  that  the  only  pure  thing  about  it  is  the 
alcohol  that  is  in  it,  and  that  is  found  more  or  less  in  all  the  liquors,  with  com- 
binations to  modify  it,  to  lessen  its  power  and  severity,  and  to  adapt  it  to  the  taste- 
I  think  it  is  just  the  same  abroad  that  it  is  here.  There  seems  to  be  an  impres- 
sion, that  if  you  get  an  imported  liquor,  you  have  got  a  true  liquor,  as  much 
as  when  you  import  a  horse  from  Arabia,  you  get  an  Arabian  horse.  But  it 
is  not  so.  If  I  understand  it,  some  of  our  alcohol, — not  much,  but  some, — is 
carried  abroad,  and  returned  here  in  imported  liquor,  which  is  supposed  to  be 
the  genuine  article  made  somewhere  where  they  make  true  liquor.  But  when 
you  go  there,  you  find  how  brandy  is  made ;  that  it  is  made  by  putting  alcohol 
and  the  skins  and  seeds  of  grapes,  and  various  other  elements  together,  and 
infusing  the  mixture  with  one  drug  and  another,  until  they  make  what 
answers  the  term  of  brandy.  That  is  manufactured  there  and  sent  here  just 
as  they  manufacture  it  at  Albany  and  Boston,  and  it  is  no  better,  perhaps,  for 
having  been  made  on  the  other  side  of  the  water  and  brought  here,  excepting 
as  the  voyage  may  make  it  better.  So  that  when  you  talk  of  pure  liquors 
and  poor  liquors,  I  think  it  is  pretty  much  sham  and  nonsense.  It  is  all  a 
manufactured  article,  all  containing  nearly  the  same  destructive  elements, 
perhaps  not  always  the  same,  but  substantially  the  same  ;  and  I  do  not  see 
why  the  liquor  obtained  by  the  State  agents  of  wholesale  dealers,  or  obtained 
from  any  other  source,  is  not  likely  to  be  as  pure  as  that  which  is  sold  in  out- 
side channels.  I  think  it  is  an  attempt  to  throw  odium  upon  the  arrangements 
which  the  State  has  made  to  supply  the  community  with  what  was  deemed  by 
the  Legislature  to  be  a  matter  of  necessity,  to  supply  the  mechanic  arts  and 
those  calls  in  the  form  of  medical  prescriptions.  At  any  rate,  I  apprehend 
"that  the  liquors  sold  by  the  State  agents  are  well  enough  for  the  purposes  for 
which  the  Commonwealth  intended  they  should  be  sold,  and  that  they  are  as 
good  as  any  that  can  be  found  in  Boston  for  these  purposes.  I  wanted  to  put 
that  thought  of  mine  before  the  Committee,  that  it  may  be  examined,  to  see 
if  there  is  anything  in  it.  I  believe  the  attack  is  wrong.  I  do  not  know  pre- 
cisely what  is  meant  by  a  restrained  license,  or  how  the  traffic  can  be 
restrained  so  as  to  be  as  safe  as  prohibition.  Our  system  of  State  agencies 
amounts  to  a  license  of  one  man  in  so  many  thousand  people,  so  that  the  com- 
munity may  have  a  supply  of  all  the  liquors.  There  is  no  limitation  there. 
The  State  agents  are  allowed  to  sell  all  those,  and  for  aught  I  see,  that  is  a 


556  APPENDIX. 

license,  restrained,  perhaps,  to  the  point  nearest  prohibition,  for  the  arts  and 
for  medicine.  If  anybody  wants  a  freer  sale  than  that,  I  would  not  object, — 
no,  I  won't  say  I  would  not  object, — but  let  it  be  opened  to  classes  of  persons. 
I  would  not  have  licenses  granted  to  sell  to  everybody.  We  never  had  such 
a  law  heretofore.  Our  license  law  was  always  restricted :  "  You  must  not  sell 
to  idiots,  paupers,  drunkards  or  minors."  These  were  excepted  classes.  If 
other  classes  want  to  be  brought  in,  and  to  have  liberty  to  buy,  let  us  see  if 
they  need  it  and  ought  to  be  supplied  with  it,  and  if  so,  name  them  in  classes ; 
men  of  a  certain  amount  of  money  ;  men  of  a  certain  standing  in  the  com- 
munity ;  men  who  think  a  little  wine  is  good  "  for  the  stomach's  sake."  If 
they  will  subscribe  that  to  the  man  who  has  it  to  sell,  let  him  sell  to  them  in 
limited  quantities.  I  would  attach  to  the  present  prohibitory  law  a  provision 
that  should  allow  any  portion  of  the  community  to  come  in  as  honorary  mem- 
bers, who  ought  to  be  entitled  to  that  distinction,  (if  there  are  any  such,)  who 
should  be  allowed  to  get  a  little  something  to  drink,  just  as  you  would  elect 
persons  honorary  members  of  an  association,  or  give  them  free  tickets  to  a 
public  dinner,  or  on  a  railroad.  I  think  I  would  confine  it  to  them.  I  don't 
see  anybody  who  is  entitled  to  it,  unless  it  is  as  a  matter  of  distinction. 

I  confess,  gentlemen  of  the  Committee,  that  I  have  pretty  strong  and 
earnest  feelings  in  this  matter,  having  been  a  soldier  in  the  cause  for  forty 
years,  having  been  a  teetotaler  for  thirty  years,  believing  that  men  can  live 
more  happily  without  liquor  than  with  it,  and  that  it  is  a  great  deal  better  to 
withhold  the  temptation  from  those  who  cannot  resist  it,  than  it  is  to  have 
open  doors  for  the  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks.  I  am  persuaded  that  temper- 
ance men  can  enforce  the  prohibitory  law ;  that  they  have  practically  enforced 
all  restraining  laws  as  far  as  they  could,  and  substantially  as  fast  as  they 
could.  As  I  said  before,  we  have  repeatedly  done  it  in  Lowell,  nearly  to  the 
extent  of  closing  up  the  shops,  and,  at  times,  the  places  of  sale  have  been 
pretty  well  closed  through  the  Commonwealth.  I  think  the  prohibitory  law 
is  very  successfully  in  operation  in  most  parts  of  the  State.  I  hope  we  shall 
be  allowed  to  try  it,  now  that  we  have  got  the  decisions  of  the  courts  in  our 
favor,  and  now  that  I  believe  that  all  temperance  men,  who  have  been  striv- 
ing and  struggling  these  forty  years,  (those  of  us  who  are  old  enough,)  are 
willing  now  to  combine  their  powers  to  enforce  this  law,  and  try  the  strength 
of  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  JEWELL.)  Do  you  think  there  is  less  drinking  now  than 
there  was  twenty-five  years  ago  among  the  middling  classes  of  community  ? 

A.  It  is  extremely  difficult  to  say,  there  are  so  many  things  which  ought 
to  come  in  in  making  up  an  opinion  on  that  matter.  In  the  first  place,  since  - 
this  temperance  enterprise  was  inaugurated,  there  has  been  a  very  great 
increase  of  population,  and  a  very  great  increase  of  the  foreign  element- 
There  are  a  great  many  things  to  be  taken  into  account  in  considering 
whether  there  is  more  liquor  drank  now  than  formerly.  If  I  were  asked 
whether  I  thought  there  were  more  temperance  men  in  this  Commonwealth 
now,  than  twenty  years  ago,  I  should  say  there  were. 

Q.    By  "  temperence  men  "  you  mean  total  abstinence  men  ? 

A.    I  mean  total  abstinence  men. 


APPENDIX.  557 

Q.  Well,  twenty,  twenty-five  and  thirty  years  ago,  it  was  not  common  at 
all,  was  it,  for  people  to  have  liquor  in  their  own  houses  ?  It  was  rather  dis- 
creditable to  have  it,  and  a  man  did  not  offer  it  to  his  neighbors  or  guests  in 
those  times  at  all  ? 

A.    I  know,  sir. 

Q.    Is  it  so  now  ? 

A.  I  think  there  are  more  families  now  who  have  wine  at  parties  and  at 
weddings  than  at  the  time  to  which  you  allude,  because  then  public  sentiment 
was  very  sharp,  and  men  did  not  like  to  run  counter  to  it.  I  remember,  now,  a 
remark  which  Mr.  Leverett  Saltonstall  made,  while  the  temperance  enterprise 
was  going  on :  "  Why,"  said  he,  "  I  am  so  afraid  of  public  sentiment  on  this 
matter,  that  when  I  take  a  tumbler  of  water  at  a  hotel,  I  take  care  to  turn  all 
round  that  everybody  may  see  it  is  water,  for  fear  they  should  think  I  was 
drinking  liquor."  There  was  such  a  feeling  in  regard  to  temperance  at  that 
time,  that  people  who  had  parties,  although  they  might  have  liked  to  have 
brought  forward  their  wines,  were  under  restraint,  and  did  not  do  it. 

Q.     That  feeling  does  not  now  prevail,  does  it  ? 

A.    It  does  not  prevail,  I  confess,  as  much  as  it  did  then. 

Q.     How  do  you  account  for  that  ? 

A.  I  account  for  it  by  the  influence  of  just  that  class  of  men  who  have 
come  here  and  testified  in  favor  of  this  license  law — men  who  have  been 
brought  out  from  their  retirement,  and  have  thrown  their  influence  against  the 
prohibitory  law.  There  was  a  class  of  men — the  upper  men,  the  upper  class 
— who,  I  will  not  say  always  held  back,  but  who  were  never  heartily  with  us ; 
but  when  they  could  not  get  along  without  submitting  to  our  influence,  they 
yielded  to  it.  Now  they  do  not ;  they  do  not  feel  under  so  much  restraint. 
I  do  not  believe  that,  twenty  years  ago,  you  could  have  found  a  man  who 
would  have  testified  in  favor  of  a  license  law  before  a  committee  of  this  Legis- 
lature. 

Q.     Public  sentiment  would  not  then  have  permitted  it  ? 

A .  No,  sir,  and  it  does  not  permit  it  now.  I  think  there  is  a  very  strong 
feeling  in  the  community  that  these  men  have  made  a  mistake ;  that  the  com- 
munity are  stronger  in  temperance  practice  and  temperance  principle  than 
they  supposed.  I  think  it  will  be  so  found.  I  think  that  if  a  license  law 
were  passed,  there  would  be  an  uprising  on  that  matter  as  there  was  with 
regard  to  the  war.  That  is  my  opinion  about  it — that  there  is  a  very  strong 
and  immense  temperance  force  in  this  community. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Don't  you  think  it  is  gaining,  the  country 
through,  very  decidedly  ? 

A.    I  think  so,  very  decidedly. 

Q.  Don't  you  conceive  the  moral  efforts  to  be  more  active  now  than  at 
any  time  for  many  years  ? 

A.  It  looks  so  to  me.  They  are  starting  up.  I  think  the  discussions 
which  have  been  had  at  Washington  upon  the  law  have  had  a  good  effect. 
The  world  understands,  by  our  daily  papers,  that  these  questions  have  been 
carried  up  there,  and  have  been  settled ;  and  now  the  temperance  people  have 
a  hope  such  as  they  have  not  had  when  the  questions  were  in  doubt.  Then, 
again,  I  think  the  temperance  revival  at  Washington,  if  I  may  call  it  so, — 


558  APPENDIX. 

though  I  don't  know  that  they  have  ever  had  anything  there  before,  so  that 
it  can  be  called  a  revival, — is  having  an  effect  all  over  the  country.  I  was  at 
the  second  great  Congressional  meeting  at  the  Capitol,  and  it  was  a  wonderful 
meeting  in  spirit — the  hall  thronged,  the  speakers  up  to  the  point,  clear  up  to 
the  point,  of  prohibition.  One  Senator  said  that  the  Capitol  had  been 
reformed,  some  year  or  two  before,  by  act  of  Congress,  and  that  it  was  now 
time  to  commence  reconstruction  at  the  other  end  of  the  Avenue ;  and  the 
ladies  were  called  upon  not  to  offer  intoxicating  drinks  to  their  January 
callers, — the  thing  coming  specifically  to  the  point,  touching,  I  thought,  the 
very  marrow-bones  of  the  people. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  spoke  of  the  efforts  that  were  made  after  the 
repeal  of  the  fifteen-gallon  law,  to  prevent  the  granting  of  licenses.  Was 
there  not,  at  that  time,  a  good  deal  of  discussion  in  all  the  towns  in  reference 
to  choosing  such  men  as  would  not  prohibit  licenses  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  that  was  one  of  our  points. 

Q.  Did  we  not  at  that  time  undertake  to  choose  such  men  always  as  were 
strict  temperance  men  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  not  that  produce  and  keep  alive  a  very  strong  temperance  feeling 
in  the  community,  from  the  periodical  return  of  the  election  of  officers,  and 
these  questions  being  involved  ? 

A.    I  have  no  doubt. 

Q.  During  the  discussions  that  followed  the  repeal  of  the  fifteen-gallon 
law,  when  an  issue  was  made  in  every  town  on  the  choice  of  men  who  would 
not  approbate  licenses,  was  or  was  not  the  effect  great  in  diminishing  the  use 
of  intoxicating  liquors  in  the  community  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  that,  so  far  as  we  could  restrain  and  withhold  licenses, 
that  diminished  it.  1  have  no  doubt  that  we  made  temperance  men  by  those 
very  influences. 

Q.  There  was,  then,  very  perceptible  progress  in  temperance,  for  four  or 
five  years  after  the  repeal,  in  1840  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  it  as  great  as  at  any  other  period  you  have  ever  known  in  your 
observation  of  the  history  of  the  enterprise  ? 

A.  Taking  the  ground  then  covered  by  the  "  Cold- Water  Army,"— for 
that  followed  at  once, — one  of  my  great  means  was  that 

Q.  That  was  in  connection  with  this  very  movement  ? — they  were  going 
on  together  ? 

A.  Precisely.  That  was  in  the  four  or  five  years  from  the  spring  of  1849 
to  1853.  We  had  the  "Cold- Water  Army,"  and  we  had  the  reformed 
drunkards  in  that  period  ;  and,  as  I  said  before,  they  excited  the  whole  Com- 
monwealth ;  went  into  every  dwelling ;  and  the  sentiment  thus  created  showed 
itself  at  the  polls  in  sending  men  to  the  Legislature  who  would  give  us  legal 
protection,  and  in  appointing  selectmen  who  would  not  apply  for  licenses  or 
recommend  persons  for  license. 

Q.  When  licenses  were  refused,  and  thus  prohibitory  law  established,  how 
was  it  during  that  period  with  regard  to  open  sales?  Take  Lowell,  for 
instance,  along  in  '42,  '3,  '4,  '5,  and  '6,  about  the  time  you  went  into  the 


APPENDIX.  559 

Police  Court,  or  prior  to  that  three  or  four  years  and  a  year  or  two  after- 
wards,— how  was  it  at  Lowell  ? 

A.  I  had  no  knowledge  of  Lowell  until  I  removed  there  in  1843.  I  went 
into  the  court  two  years  and  a  half  after  I  went  to  Lowell.  There  were  open 
sales,  excepting  in  spasms,  when  we  had  the  right  city  government.  When  the 
mayor,  the  city  government  generally,  the  marshal  and  the  police,  sympa- 
thized with  the  movement,  we  had  no  trouble,  and  did,  in  one  or  two 
instances,  shut  up  the  shops ;  but  generally  in  Lowell  there  have  been  open 
sales. 

Q.  I  have  no  doubt  of  that ;  but  whether  at  that  time  there  were  as  many 
open  places  of  sale  in  violation  of  law,  while  the  licenses  were  withheld,  as 
there  have  been  at  other  times  ? 

A.  I  apprehend  the  increase  of  population  would  qualify  that  somewhat. 
There  was  a  large  increase  of  population  after  1843  in  Lowell ;  probably 
there  were  more  places  for  sale.  I  don't  know  but  there  are  more  places  for 
sale  now  than  there  were  at  that  period.  But  there  are  not  as  many  places 
for  sale  now,  and  not  so  much  drunkenness  now,  as  there  was  before  the  war. 
After  the  close  of  the  war,  for  a  little  while,  there  was  a  great  deal  of  drunk- 
enness, but  that  has  passed  away,  and  there  is  much  less,  in  my  estimation,  as 
far  as  I  can  judge  of  it. 

Q.     The  statement  was  made  here  the  other  day  that  the,  number  of  per- 
sons arrested  for  drunkenness  by  your  police  was  greater'siAceJ  iSheJ-vrar  lfca£  \     \ 
during  that  time. 

A.    For  awhile.  |  U  JST  J  V  K  J  |  s  |'J'  y     ( 

Q.    Now — even  last  year,  1866. 

A.     It  may  be  so.  (]  \  [  ^  j  p(  >  j  >  *    r    , 

Q.     You  have  not  consulted  any  statistics  ?          >^ 

A.     No,  sir.    I  have  not  looked  at  anything. 

Q.  Then  the  drinking-habits,  usages  and  practices  of  the  people  were 
really  very  much  diminished  during  that  period  of  temperance  effort,  after 
1840,  when  the  fifteen-gallon  law  was  repealed  ? 

A.    I  should  say  so. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  period  in  your  observation  and  knowledge  of  this 
temperance  reform,  in  which  apparently  greater  or  as  great  progress  was 
made  as  during  that  period? 

A.  I  think  the  friends  of  temperance  became  perhaps  alarmed  when  that 
law,  which  only  prohibited  sales  under  fifteen  gallons,  was  repealed.  They 
were  impressed  with  the  power  which  was  brought  up  from  unexpected 
sources  against  that  law,  and  they  applied  themselves,  as  I  said,  very  diligently 
and  earnestly  to  the  "  Cold  Water  Army  "  and  to  the  reformed  drunkards, 
and  they  created  such  an  impression  through  the  Commonwealth  that  there 
was  great  advance  in  temperance  sentiment. 

Q.  The  present  prohibitory  law  is  a  more  perfect  machine,  in  your  opinion 
if  I  get  the  right  impression  from  your  testimony,  than  that  law  was  ? 

A.  It  is  more  perfect,  inasmuch  as  it  covers  all  sales,  and  that  covered  only 
those  under  fifteen  gallons. 

Q.  No,  I  mean  the  twenty-eight  gallon  law.  After  the  repeal  of  the 
fifteen-gallon  law,  we  had  the  old  license  law  or  twenty-eight  gallon  law  in 


560  APPENDIX. 

force,  but  which  was  suspended  in  some  cases  by  the  action  of  the  towns  and 
counties,  and  therefore,  practically,  there  was  prohibition.  The  present  pro- 
hibitory law  you  regard  as  better  than  that  twenty-eight  gallon  law,  and  the 
people  withholding  licenses  under  it.  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  It  was  after  the  repeal  of  the  fifteen-gallon  law  that  there  was  the 
greatest  progress  in  temperance  you  have  known  in  the  history  of  the  reforma- 
tion ? 

A .    Yes,  sir,  after  the  repeal  of  the  fifteen-gallon  law. 

Q.  Now,  under  the  present  better  law,  in  your  judgment,  do  you  think 
that  from  1852  down  to  the  present  time,  the  progress  of  temperance  has  been 
as  great  during  any  three  or  five  years  as  during  the  period  you  have  testified 
to? 

A .  No,  sir,  I  think  not,  and  for  this  reason,  (if  I  may  be  allowed  to  state 
the  reason,  as  I  have  answered  the  question  directly  :)  The  community  then, 
as  I  said  before,  all  united,  and  gave  the  field  to  the  "  Cold  Water  Army"  and 
reformed  drunkards.  Since  the  prohibitory  law,  we  have  been,  as  I  remarked 
before,  trying  questions  of  law  all  the  way  through,  and  met  with  various 
hindrances  and  delays  by  the  accumulation  of  cases.  We,  therefore,  have  not 
had  the  full  benefit  of  the  law.  When  we  were  about  to  have  its  due  enforce- 
ment, under  the  decisions  of  our  own  courts,  the  cases  would  be  carried  up. 
Then  the  war  came  on,  and  we  have  been  kept  in  abeyance  until  now.  Under 
the  new  settlement,  as  it  seems  to  me,  we  may  have  a  revival  all  round. 

Q.  Was  there  not  a  more  vigorous  action  of  public  sentiment  upon  the 
question  for  a  few  years  after  the  repeal  of  the  fifteen-gallon  law,  than  there 
has  been  since  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  your  opinion,  is  not  that  action  of  the  public  voice  and  public 
opinion  necessary  to  make  any  law  on  this  subject  effective  ? 

A.  It  is  an  advantage,  undoubtedly,  to  have  public  sentiment  go  with 
public  prosecutions  under  the  law ;  but  they  are  not  necessarily  connected. 

Q.  Do  you  think  you  can  execute  a  law  with  any  effect  with  the  entire 
public  sentiment  against  it  ? 

A.  No,  I  think  not,  and  perhaps  that  is  the  reason  why  the  law  against 
profanity  is  not  enforced.  There  are  too  many  profane  people,  and  a  great 
many  men  say,  "  On  the  whole,  I  would  not  have  prosecutions  under  that ; " 
but  the  law  remains  and  may  be  enforced  against  individuals. 

Q.  I  will  ask  you  again,  Judge,  do  you  think  that  unless  the  public  senti- 
ment is  such  that  it  demands  through  the  courts  and  municipal  officers  and 
juries  the  execution  of  the  law,  any  law  upon  such  a  subject  as  this  will  be 
executed,  so  as  to  produce  any  effect  upon  the  drinking  usages  of  society? 

A^  Perhaps  not.  I  think  that  question  should  be  qualified.  As  I  said 
before,  I  think  law  may  be  maintained,  even  if  public  sentiment  does  not 
fully  concur  in  its  enforcement. 

Q.  That  was  not  precisely  the  question.  A  certain  amount  of  public 
sentiment  is  necessary,  is  it  not,  upon  any  of  these  laws,  to  secure  convictions 
through  courts  and  juries,  or  secure  the  administration  and  execution  of  them 
by  constables  and  police  officers  ? 


APPENDIX.  561 

A.     Well,  I  will  admit  that. 
Q.     That  is  true,  is  it  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  that  is  true;  but  I  think  the  doctrine  is  this,  Mr.  Child : 
There  is  a  public  sentiment  in  favor  of  law  all  through  the  Commonwealth. 
The  question  about  enforcing  it  is,  how  much  resistance  you  are  to  meet  to  its 
enforcement  ? 

Q.  Is  there  any  public  sentiment  in  the  Commonwealth  in  favor  of  the 
execution  of  a  law  because  it  is  law,  (I  do  not  say  that  this  is  applicable  to 
the  prohibitory  law,)  which  the  moral  sense  of  the  community  rejects  ?  Take 
the  fugitive  slave  law — did  that  have  any  force  at  all  in  Massachusetts,  any 
more  than  a  piece  of  parchment  ? 

A.  Well,  it  carried  a  man  out  of  the  State.  I  suppose  it  had  that  amount 
of  force.  People  resisted  it. 

Q.  Had  it  any  other  effect  than*  to  create  a  spirit  of  resistance  to  that 
law  ? 

A.    I  think  it  did  create  that,  rightfully. 

Q.  Then  such  a  law  as  that,  not  in  accordance  with  public  sentiment,  can 
do  no  good  as  a  reforming  and  restraining  measure  in  any  community  ? 

A.  Not  when  the  public  sentiment  of  the  community  is  aroused  so  as  to 
make  that  opinion  felt. 

Q.  You  say  there  is  not  the  same  public  sentiment  in  favor  of  the  pro- 
hibitory law  as  there  was  in  favor  of  the  state  of  things  in  1838, — can  you 
give  any  reason  why  that  is  so  ? 

A.  I  beg  your  pardon,  I  say  right  the  other  way — that  I  think  there  is  a 
moral  and  temperance  sentiment  through  this  Commonwealth  which  is  strong 
enough  to  enforce  the  law. 

Q.  But  not  the  same  amount  ?  If  I  understood  you,  you  stated  that  there 
was  not  the  same  amount ;  that  there  are  men  who  were  held  back  and  did 
not  move,  and  now  they  do  move ;  that  there  is  not  the  same  amount  of  senti- 
ment among  a  certain  "  higher  class,"  you  call  them,  in  favor  of  enforcing  this 
law,  as  there  was  for  the  enforcement  of  that.  Why  is  this  ? 

A.  I  have  not  said  that,  if  I  have  understood  myself.  I  said  there  was 
an  unexpected  effort  on  the  part  of  a  certain  higher  class,  headed  by  Mr.  Otis, 
to  break  down  that  law,  just  as  there  is,  to  my  surprise,  now,  to  defeat 
the  present  law ;  but  that  I  believed  that  for  five  or  seven  years  after  the 
repeal  of  that  law,  there  was  greater  progress  under  the  moral  influences 
brought  to  bear  upon  the  question  by  the  "  Cold  Water  Army,"  the  reformed 
drunkards,  and  the  temperance  people,  than  at  any  other  time,  or  than  there 
is  now ;  but,  as  I  said  before,  I  believe  there  is  now  in  this  Commonwealth, 
and  through  the  country,  but  especially  in  this  Commonwealth,  a  power  that 
would  come  up,  on  the  enactment  of  a  license  law  in  this  Commonwealth,  as 
the  loyal  sentiment  of  the  country  came  up  when  Sumpter  was  fired  upon. 
It  exists  now,  only  it  has  been  scattered. 

Q.     After  the  repeal  of  the  fifteen-gallon  law,  the  hostility  of  the  men 
you  refer  to — Harrison  Gray  Otis,  and  others — ceased,  did  it  not  ? 
A.     Oh,  it  subsided. 

Q.    They  made  no  further  active  demonstrations  ? 
71 


562  APPENDIX. 

A.  It  subsided.  I  always  believed  they  were  pushed  into  it,  Mr.  Child, 
and  therefore  there  was  a  reason  why  they  subsided. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  is  anything  to  create  a  feeling  against  the  execu- 
tion of  this  law,  in  the  fact  that  it  makes  the  seller  only  a  criminal,  not  the 
drinker  ? 

A>  I  don't  see  any  objection  to  it  on  that  account.  I  don't  think  there 
is  any  objection. 

Q.    Is  there  any  crime  or  wrong  in  selling  liquor,  if  it  be  not  drank  ? 

A.     The  law  don't  make  it  so  now,  sir. 

Q.    Is  there  any,  in  your  opinion  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    It  is  an  innocent  act  to  sell  ? 

A.    Would  be,  to  sell  for  proper  purposes. 

Q.     Can  there  be  any  wrong  to  the  community,  unless  it  be  drank  ? 

A.  Well,  if  it  is  against  the  law,  it  is  wrong  ;  but  I  don't  see  any  moral 
wrong.  You  were  asking  for  sin. 

Q.    1  mean  moral  wrong  ? 

A.    No. 

Q.  Is  there  any  objection,  in  your  idea,  to  the  principle,  when  you  would 
restrain  an  evil,  of  making  the  act  criminal  that  don't  produce  the  evil,  and 
cannot  produce  it,  and  leaving  the  act  that  does  produce  it,  in  part,  at  least 
free  from  punishment  ? 

A.  That  is  a  question  which  perhaps  is  not  involved  here,  because  we  do 
punish  the  man  who  drinks.  We  don't  punish  him  for  buying. 

Q.  You  punish  a  man  for  selling,  but  if  you  drink  a  glass  and  do  not  get 
drunk,  you  are  not  punished  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  would  punish  you  for  poisoning  my  spring ;  I  would  not  be 
punished  for  drinking  the  water. 

Q.  That  is  a  crime  of  one  man  against  another,  and  not  analogous  at  all. 
Is  it  wrong,  in  your  opinion,  in  all  cases  and  under  all  circumstances,  to  drink 
a  glass  of  intoxicating  liquor  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  if  you  mean  by  "  all  circumstances  "  a  man  in  health.  I  think 
so,  as  a  beverage.  I  think  it  is  a  sin. 

Q.     A  sin,  per  se  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  per  se. 

Q.     Then  you  think  it  a  sin,  per  se,  for  any  man  to  drink  a  glass  of  wine  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  it  a  sin  eighteen  hundred  years  ago  for  a  man  to  drink  a  glass  of 
wine? 

A.  Perhaps  so,  if  he  had  the  same  light  that  we  have  now  upon  the 
matter. 

Q.  Don't  you  think  the  Saviour  of  the  world  had  upon  this  whole  subject 
more  light  than  all  the  rest  of  us  ? 

A.    I  dare  say. 

Q.  If  it  was  wrong  for  those  people,  at  the  marriage  feast  in  Cana,  to 
drink  a  glass  of  wine,  would  He  have  miraculously  provided  it  ? 

A.  Show  me  that  it  was  intoxicating,  and  then  I  will  draw  my  inference 
about  it. 


APPENDIX.  563 

Q.     Have  you  ever  known  any  wine  that  was  not  intoxicating  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  a  great  deal. 

Q.    What  is  it  ? 

A.     The  juice  of  the  grape,  unfermented. 

Q.  Is  that  a  wine  ?  Can  anybody  drink  it,  any  more  than  they  could  dish- 
water ? 

A.  We  call  apple  juice,  before  it  is  fermented,  cider.  I  don't  know 
why  we  should  not  call  the  unfermented  juice  of  the  grape,  wine. 

Q.     Wouldn't  you  convict  a  man  for  selling  cider  before  it  was  fermented  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  because  the  law  says  cider. 

Q.     Do  you  believe  the  law  right  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Don't  you  believe  it  a  sin  for  a  man  to  drink  it  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  don't. 

Q.  We  are  upon  the  question  of  sin  per  se.  You  know  very  well  the 
distinction  between  malum  in  se  and  malwn  proJiibitum.  Is  it  wrong  per  se  to 
drink  a  glass  of  cider  before  fermentation  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Then  the  law  is  the  only  thing  that  makes  it  wrong  ? 

A.     The  law  makes  it  wrong. 

Q.  In  regard  to  this  matter  of  wine,  will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  how 
you  make  it  out  that  it  is  a  sin  per  se  for  any  one  to  drink  a  glass  of  wine  ? 

A.  I  make  it  out  in  this  way,  Mr.  Child.  My  knowledge  upon  the  subject 
is  this,  that  alcohol  is  indigestible,  and  that  when  a  man  takes  it,  he  takes  that 
which  is  an  absolute  injury  to  him.  I  hold  that  it  becomes  a  sin  in  a  man  to 
take  that  which  he  knows  is  going  to  hurt  him,  or  that  does  not  maintain  his 
physical  energies,  as  God  has  a  right  to  expect  him  to  do ;  and  whenever  he 
takes  that  which  will  injure  his  physical,  mental  or  moral  power,  knowing 
that  that  is  to  be  the  effect  of  it,  however  small,  it  is  just  so  far,  sin. 

Q.  Then  you  make  the  sin  per  se  of  any  act  to  depend  upon  the  previously 
ascertained  physiological  effect  that  may  follow  the  act  ? 

A.  Just  as  I  make  it  out  that  it  would  be  sin  in  a  man  to  run  a  dagger 
into  himself.  That  would  be  a  sin.  I  have  no  right  to  destroy  my  life  or 
injure  my  person. 

Q.  There  would  be  no  doubt  that  that  was  an  injury,  but  whether  this 
glass  of  pure  wine,  or  fermented  wine, — because  I  do  not  understand  that 
there  is  anything  else  called  wine, — would  injure  you,  is  a  question. 

A.  That  is  arbitrary,  to  say  that  there  is  no  wine  except  that  which  is 
fermented. 

Q.  Is  not  that  the  same  word  which  is  contained  in  the  New  Testament, 
and  in  Homer,  when  he  describes  the  bacchanalian  revels  ? 

A.    Precisely. 

Q.     Don't  the  Saviour  of  the  world  use  the  same  word  ? 

A.  Very  well.  I  make  the  distinction  in  cider.  I  say  the  unfermented 
juice  of  the  apple  is  called  cider,  just  as  we  call  the  unfermented  juice  of  the 
grape,  wine. 

Q.  By  what  process  can  you  preserve  the  common  juice  of  the  grape  beyond 
a  day  or  two,  without  fermentation  taking  place  ? 


564  APPENDIX. 

A.     Only  in  the  form  of  what  is  called petmez. 

Q.    What  is  that  ? 

A.  The  juice  is  evaporated  by  the  heat  of  the  sun,  or,  more  generally,  by 
boiling.  It  is  a  process  known  in  Palestine.  They  boil  it,  and  reduce  it  to  a 
sort  of  molasses, — what  they  call  petmez.  That  was  imported  from  abroad 
for  many  years,  to  be  extended  by  water  again,  for  the  communion  service,  so 
as  to  have  the  unfermented  juice  of  the  grape. 

Q.    Do  you  call  that  wine  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  believe,  as  a  matter  of  common  sense,  that  any  such  sort  of 
liquor  was  drank  at  the  marriage  in  Cana  ? 

A.     "  Wine  "  is  a  general  term,  and  it  covers  all  these  varieties.    It  is  wi  ae. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SHERMAN.)  You  say  the  sin  may  consist  in  the  consciousness 
of  the  man  who  drinks  it  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  his  consciousness  of  the  physiological  fact  that  it  must  injure 
him. 

Q.  Then,  if  I  drink  coffee  to  excess,  and  am  conscious  that  the  second  or 
third  cup  is  going  to  injure  me,  don't  I  commit  the  same  sin  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  to  you. 

Q.  Suppose  that  to-day,  at  dinner,  I,  as  an  individual,  debate  between  two 
or  three  cups  of  strong  coffee,  knowing  it  will  hurt  me,  and  one  glass  of  cider, 
believing  it  will  do  me  good.  In  such  a  case,  should  I  sin  the  more  by  drink- 
ing the  cider  or  the  coffee  ?  I  have  an  honest  belief  in  the  one  case  that  the 
cider  would  do  me  good ;  I  have  as  honest  a  belief  in  the  other  that  the  coffee 
would  do  me  harm. 

A.  In  the  one  case,  I  should  think  you  had  informed  yourself,  and  there- 
fore had  come  to  the  conclusion  that  the  coffee  was  hurting  you.  In  the  other, 
I  should  consider  it  sinful  in  you  not  to  inform  yourself  that  the  alcohol  would 
injure  you. 

Q.  But  suppose  I  had  informed  myself,  as  I  supposed,  and  believed  that 
the  cider  would  do  me  good,  and  was  honest  in  the  belief  that  I  had  so 
informed  myself? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  think  if  you  had  cultivated  your  powers  to  the  greatest 
extent,  and  been  honestly  trying  to  ascertain  the  truth,  that  it  would  not  be 
charged  against  you.  I  think  it  would  not  be  sin  if  you  did  the  best  you 
could  about  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  I  would  like  to  inquire  of  you,  as  a  man  of  learning 
and  historical  research,  (which  I  know  to  be  the  fact,)  if  you  know  that  wine, 
during  the  whole  history  of  the  Jewish  nation,  was  used  at  their  Paschal 
feasts  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  it  was  the  common  wine  of  the  country,  which 
was  a  grape-growing  country,  that  was  used  there  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  When  the  Saviour  of  the  world  instituted  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's 
Supper,  do  you  imagine  that  this  process  of  making  petmez  was  resorted  to 
to  get  something  to  drink  on  that  occasion,  or  did  they  take  the  common 
wine  of  the  country  ? 


APPENDIX.  565 

A.    I  don't  feel  capable  of  explaining  a  miracle. 

Q.  I  am  not  asking  you  to.  At  the  Passover,  the  common  wine  of  the 
country  had  been  used  by  the  Jews  for  a  thousand  years,  in  their  Paschal 
feasts,  and  the  Saviour  then  established  the  Lord's  Supper,  by  administering 
wine.  I  ask  you  if  you  have  any  reason  to  suppose  that  a  process  had  been 
resorted  to  to  get  an  article  called  petmez,  to  be  used  on  that  occasion,  or 
whether  you  suppose  it  was  the  common  wine,  such  as  had  been  used  at  the 
Paschal  feasts  ? 

A.  I  arn  by  no  means  sure  that  the  wine  on  that  occasion  was  not  squeezed 
by  the  hand  from  the  grape. 

Q.    Is  there  any  reason  to  suppose  so  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Why? 

A.  It  was  the  common  way  of  getting  wine  from  the  grape,  by  squeezing 
it.  There  is  no  way  of  knowing  how  they  got  it. 

Q.     Did  they  not  have  wine-presses  ? 

A.  They  trampled  it  out,  expressed  it  by  the  feet,  and  expressed  it  at  the 
table  by  hand. 

Q.  Was  not  the  cultivation  of  the  vine  and  the  use  of  the  wine-press  a 
common  thing  in  the  Saviour's  time  in  Palestine  ? 

A .  Yes,  sir,  I  have  no  doubt  of  it ;  I  have  no  doubt  wine  was  fermented 
I  have  no  doubt  people  drank  too  much  of  it ;  and  I  have  no  doubt  that  the 
use  of  wine  in  that  form  had  become  so  prevalent  a  sin  that  it  was  proclaimed 
in  the  gospel  that  drunkards  cannot  enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven.  There 
must  have  been  enough  to  make  drunkards. 

Q.  Does  it  say  the  man  who  drinks  a  glass  of  wine  shall  not  enter  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Is  there  any  denunciation  in  the  New  Testament  against  drinking  a 
glass  of  wine  ? 

A.    It  only  says  that  one  who  has  offended  in  the  least  point  is  guilty  of  all. 

Q.  Is  the  drinking  of  a  glass  of  wine  anywhere  denounced  in  the  New 
Testament  as  a  sin  ? 

A.     There  is  something  said  about  wine  being  "  red  in  the  cup." 

Q.  Now,  Judge,  in  a  matter  where  the  attempt  is  made  by  criminal  law 
to  change  the  drinking  habits  of  the  people,  is  it  not  necessary,  in  order  to 
give  any  efficiency  to  such  a  law,  that  it  should  be  sustained  by  public 
opinion  ? 

A.    I  think  it  is  well. 

Q.     Can  any  good  result  unless  it  is  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  I  think  it  can.  I  think  there  is  great  moral  power  in  a  law 
of  prohibition  against  any  iniquity,  any  vice.  If  it  remains  on  the  statute 
book  without  being  enforced,  I  think  there  is  great  moral  power  in  it.  I  think 
there  is  a  moral  power  involved  in  its  being  there. 

Q.  Is  there  an  equal  moral  power  in  anything  upon  the  statute  book  per- 
mitting a  thing,  to  sanction  it  ?  Is  there  a  moral  power  in  that,  as  well  as  in 
prohibiting  ? 


566  APPENDIX. 

A.  No,  sir,  I  think  not.  I  think  it  is  a  great  deal  better  to  prohibit 
houses  of  assignation  than  to  license  them,  as  I  see  there  is  a  movement  to 
license  them  in  another  city. 

Q.  In  your  opinion,  was  not  the  efficiency  of  the  prohibitory  law,  as  it 
practically  existed  after  the  repeal  of  the  fifteen-gallon  law,  owing  to  the  fact 
that  it  was  annually  maintained  by  the  voluntary  action  of  the  people  in 
choosing  men  who  were  opposed  to  licensing  ? 

A.    I  have  no  doubt  that  had  -a  good  influence. 

Q.  Suppose  you  had  the  same  thing  now,  and  gave  liberty  to  such  cities 
and  towns  as  pleased  to  permit  the  sale,  under  very  stringent  restrictions,  and 
then,  if  they  refused  to  permit  the  sale,  retained  the  present  law,  with  all  its 
machinery,  in  force, — how  would  that  do  ?  Would  it  not  operate  better  than 
the  present  law  ? 

A .  It  would  undoubtedly  stir  up  the  community  to  make  the  best  of  it, 
and  to  prevent  the  sale ;  but  I  think  it  is  an  unnecessary  labor,  an  unnecessary 
work. 

Q.  Suppose  that  this  law  should  be  merely  modified,  so  that  cities  and 
towns  might  permit  tavern-keepers  to  furnish  it  to  their  guests,  and  druggists 
in  the  way  of  their  calling  for  family  purposes,  and  grocers,  not  to  be  drunk 
on  the  premises,  with  no  public  bars  allowed  in  taverns,  and  the  prohibitory 
law  in  full  force  against  all  who  violate  these  provisions,  and  the  question 
whether  they  will  have  even  that  left  to  cities  and  towns,  would  it  not  be 
better  than  the  present  law  ? 

A.  I  think  not.  I  think  it  would  accumulate  the  difficulties  in  the  way  of 
enforcing  it.  If  we  have  a  license  law,  or  any  law  whatever,  it  is  to  be 
enforced  by  the  same  men  who  have  enforced  the  law  before.  The  men  who 
have  appeared  before  this  Committee  in  favor  of  a  license  law  are  not  the 
men  to  enforce  a  law. 

Q.     We  are  to  have  the  State  Constabulary,  are  we  not  ? 

A.  Who  are  the  State  Constabulary  to  stand  upon  but  the  old  temperance 
men  ?  They  are  not  standing  upon  the  men  -who  have  been  here. 

Q.     You  are  not  going  to  abandon  the  temperance  reform  ? 

A.    I  will  not  abandon  it  under  any  law. 

Q.     You  are  going  to  stand  by  ? 

A.    I  am  going  to  stand  by. 

Q.    You  say  such  a  law  was  better  then ;  why  won't  it  be  now  ? 

A.    I  say  it  is  an  unnecessary  labor. 

Q.    Is  there  any  other  reason  ? 

A.     The  accumulated  difficulties  in  enforcing  it. 

Q.     Won't  you  explain  what  those  "  accumulated  difficulties  "  are  ? 

A.  You  say  you  are  to  have  no  open  bar.  Then  when  a  man  is  drunk, 
you  have  got  to  find  out  where  he  got  his  liquor.  It  increases  the  difficulty. 

Q.  One  provision  is,  that  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen,  or  whoever  gives  a 
license,  shall  have  the  privilege  of  revoking  it,  without  giving  any  reason  to 
anybody.  What  is  the  difficulty  of  enforcing  such  a  law,  if  the  people  will 
put  men  in  to  enforce  it  ? 

A.  I  would  rather  have  it  in  my  own  hands  than  in  those  of  the  Mayor. 
I  don't  want  to  throw  the  responsibility  on  the  mayor.  I  think  the  people 


APPENDIX.  567 

•will  carry  it  out  better  than  the  men  who  are  elected  by  the  people  in  doubt- 
ful places. 

Q.  It  will  depend  entirely  upon  the  action  of  the  people  whether  there  is 
any  liquor  sold  or  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  But  then  we  know  that  in  the  war  we  were  obliged  to  lay 
aside  temperance  candidates  for  loyal  candidates.  We  could  not  raise  the 
question  at  the  ballot-box. 

Q.     The  war  has  passed,  hasn't  it  ? 

A.    I  know  ;  I  am  only  illustrating  by  that. 

Q.  You  would  in  that  way  have  the  same  machinery  and  the  same  power 
that  you  have  now,  and  you  would  have  the  public  sentiment  aroused  and 
sharpened  every  year  ? 

A.  My  idea  is  this :  that  if  the  old  temperance  men  are  to  run  the  machine, 
whatever  it  is,  they  should  choose  their  own  machine,  and  not  have  one  put 
into  their  hands  by  men  who  don't  want  a  machine  at  all. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  McCLELLAN.)  I  would  like  to  inquire  whether  you  see  any 
difficulty  in  submitting  this  question  to  the  people  of  the  towns  every  year  ? 
Whether  it  would  be  better  than  to  have  a  law  which  would  operate  uniformly 
throughout  the  State? 

A.  I  think  it  would  be  better  to  have  a  uniform  law,  and  one  that  would 
not  be  up  and  down  according  to  the  whims  or  political  influence  of  localities. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  If  I  understand  you,  you  say  that  the  temperance 
men  should  have  a  law  to  satisfy  themselves.  You  think  that  that  portion  of 
the  people  who  think  there  is  not  wisdom  in  this  law  should  not  be  consulted 
at  all.  Give  you  a  law,  and  you  will  execute  it.  Do  you  mean  that  ? 

A.  I  mean  this,  sir  :  that  while  those  men  will  not  come  out  and  identify 
themselves  particularly  with  this  cause,  they  should  not  come  out  and  throw 
hindrances  in  the  way  of  those  who  have  surveyed  the  whole  field,  and  think 
they  understand  the  topic,  and  the  means  of  bringing  about  the  end  better 
than  retired  men,  who  have  not  looked  at  it. 

Q.  Then  your  idea  is,  that  you  and  your  temperance  friends  know  better 
about  this  than  other  men  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  just  as  manufacturers  know  better  about  their  business  than 
I  do. 

Q.     And  others  should  have  nothing  to  do  with  it  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  do  not  say  they  should  have  nothing  to  do  with  it.  I  think 
it  follows  that  those  who  have  watched  the  temperance  enterprise  forty  years, 
know  better  what  is  necessary  than  those  who  have  cared  nothing  about  it. 

Q.     And  you  are  unwilling  that  those  men  should  have  any  voice  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  If  they  will  come  in  and  say  that  they  are  a  privileged  class, 
and  want  further  accommodations,  I  will  grant  them. 

Q.  You  mean  to  say,  that  those  men  who  are  opposed  to  a  prohibitory  law 
should  not  have  any  voice  in  the  business  of  passing  a  law  to  be  executed  upon 
the  whole  people — that  their  sentiments  should  not  be  consulted  at  all  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  don't  say  that.  They  have  the  same  right  to  come  here 
that  I  have  ;  but  I  understand  they  are  in  the  minority. 


568  APPENDIX. 

Q.  There  are  certain  classes  in  the  community  who  are  opposed  to  this 
prohibitory  law  and  its  working,  and  would  like  some  modification.  You 
think  they  should  not  have  any  voice  in  making  the  law  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     You  would  not  modify  it  at  all  to  accommodate  their  views  ? 

A.     Only  as  I  have  suggested. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  great  moral  efforts  at  the  present  time  by  the  Sons 
of  Temperance  and  other  societies.  Are  those  secret  societies  ? 

A.  I  cannot  answer,  because  I  have  never  been  in  them.  I  am  one  of  the 
old  temperance  standards. 

Q.     Are  their  efforts,  whatever  they  are,  open  and  before  the  public  ? 

A.  I  see  accounts  of  them  in  The  Nation.  I  know  they  exist  with  us,  and 
I  know  they  hold  their  meetings. 

Q.  Do  they  hold  meetings-  that  are  open  to  the  public,  or  are  they 
private  ? 

A .     For  aught  I  know,  all  get  in  who  go. 

Q-     Do  they  advertise  their  meetings,  and  invite  the  public  to  come  ? 

A.  I  believe  they  call  their  meetings  as  all  other  temperance  meetings  are 
called.  I  have  more  or  less  knowledge  of  them  by  having  persons  who  are 
brought  into  my  court  charged  with  drunkenness,  say  they  will  go  and  join 
the  Sons  of  Temperance,  if  we  will  let  them  go.  We  let  them  off,  and  they 
go  and  join  the  society.  I  only  know  that  the  society  is  in  existence. 

Q.     And  their  proceedings  are  not  public  ? 

A.     I  don't  know  anything  about  their  proceedings. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONEU.)  Brother  Child  has  asked  you  several  questions, 
taking  it  for  granted  that  public  opinion  is  not  up  to  the  enforcement  of  this 
law.  Now,  is  it  not  a  fact,  that  public  opinion  all  the  time  has  been  call- 
ing for  the  enforcement  of  this  law, — temperance  men,  moderate  drinkers, 
and  all  the  people,  except  the  liquor-sellers  ? 

A.  I  can  say  this,  that  I  have  attended  many  of  the  quarterly  meetings  of 
the  Temperance  Alliance  in  my  district.  They  are  almost  always  devising 
ways  to  enforce  the  law ;  and,  as  I  said  at  the  outset,  I  think  there  is  now  a 
concentration  of  public  sentiment,  and  of  the  various  forces  that  have  been  scat- 
tered heretofore,  to  enforce  this  law.  I  think  all  the  forces  we  have  put  from 
time  to  time  into  the  field  will  now  combine,  because  they  take  encourage- 
ment from  the  fact  that  the  decisions  of  the  courts  are  in  our  favor. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  JOSEPH  WHITE. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  know  the  question  is  whether  we  shall  have 
a  license  law  as  a  substitute  for  the  present  prohibitory  law.  I  should  like 
your  experience  upon  that  question. 

A.  It  is  a  pretty  broad  question.  So  far  as  my  own  feelings,  convictions 
and  judgment  are  concerned,  I  am  in  favor  of  letting  the  law  stand.  If  any 
modifications  are  to  be  made  in  it,  so  make  them  as  to  make  it  more  easy  of 
execution.  According  to  my  judgment,  the  law  is  but  the  expression  of  the 
moral  conviction  of  a  majority  of  the  people  of  Massachusetts,  and  therefore 
stands  on  good  ground.  It  has  not  been  executed  as  some  hoped  it  would  be 
executed.  I  never  expected  the  law  would  run  perfectly  under  twenty  years^ 


APPENDIX.  569 

I  supposed  it  would  take  twenty  years  to  make  a  law  that  would  operate  as 
freely  as  a  law  against  theft  or  other  offences  against  society  which  had  been 
longer  acknowledged  than  this  one  of  the  temptation  to  dram-drinking.  But 
I  believed  the  time  would  come  when  the  law  would  be  respected  and  would 
operate  freely  and  to  a  large  measure  fully  throughout  the  State.  I  believe 
it  now.  Being  founded  in  what  I  conceive  to  be  the  moral  convictions  of  the 
people  of  this  Commonwealth,  and  being  the  only  thing  which  the  people* 
after  forty  years  of  effort,  have  found  to  be  good  for  anything  on  the  statute 
book,  I  think  they  are  disposed  to  try  it  until  that  question  is  settled.  We 
have  lived  under  a  license  system,  we  and  our  fathers,  from  the  Puritans  down 
to  a  recent  period ;  and,  as  I  understand,  the  movement  against  dram-drinking 
in  the  country,  which  went  just  about  as  far  as  it  could  go,  reaching  a  vast 
majority  of  the  people  between  the  two  extremes,  was  stopped  (if  it  was 
stopped  at  all)  by  the  fact  that  the  men  who  had  been  drunkards  and  were 
converted  were  bowled  down  by  the  men  who  wanted  to  sell,  and  the  new 
generation  that  was  coming  up  was  constantly  in  the  way  of  temptation  to  the 
formation  of  habits  which  were  contrary  to  the  feelings  and  opinions  and 
practices  of  their  fathers.  I  do  not  believe  you  can  make  a  temperate  com- 
munity unless  the  principles  which  underlie  temperate  action  are  embodied  in 
law.  Law  is  the  natural  and  proper  expression,  among  a  free  people,  of  their 
convictions  with  reference  to  all  matters  that  touch  social  life,  where  social 
life  and  political  life  unite  ;  and  political  life  is  nothing  but  the  right  arm  of 
social  life,  to  protect  it.  I  am  not  much  acquainted  with  the  social  habits  of 
Boston,  although  I  live  here,  but  I  live  at  the  State  House.  I  know  something 
about  the  country,  and  the  country,  with  the  exception  of  its  imported  citizens, 
is  substantially  a  sober  country,  and  does  not  want  this  law  changed,  else  I 
am  exceedingly  mistaken ;  and  wherever  the  authorities  of  a  town  are  disposed 
in  earnest  to  enforce  the  law,  they  succeed.  Now  let  me  give  you  an  instance. 
Take  Pittsfield,  which  has  been  characterized,  as  I  understand,  by  Dr.  Todd, 
and  therefore  I  will  not  take  the  responsibility  here  of  characterizing  it.  We 
held  our  county  fair  there  three  days.  I  was  told  by  one  of  the  leading  men 
of  our  town,  that  a  day  or  two  before  the  fair,  the  Selectmen  passed  round 
among  the  drinking-places,  and  said,  "  Shut  up  !  We  won't  have  you  open 
for  these  three  days  !  "  And  they  shut  up.  That  shows  that  when  men  are 
determined  to  do  it,  they  can  do  it.  In  that  county,  while  attending  fairs  and 
commencement  exercises,  it  is  the  rarest  thing  in  the  world  for  me  to  see  an 
intoxicated  man,  except  imported  men,  who  are  almost  all,  since  Father 
Mathew  died,  drinking  men. 

I  need  not  state,  what  has  been  so  often  stated  by  men  who  know  better 
than  I  do,  the  hindrances  which  the  law  has  met  with  in  its  execution ; — just 
such  as  were  to  be  expected ;  just  such  as  would  be  met  with  by  any  law.  It 
is  a  criminal'law  in  its  nature,  and  all  doubts  are  taken  in  favor  of  the  accused, 
whenever  an  indictment  is  to  be  picked  in  pieces,  or  whenever  a  jury  is  to 
act ;  and  every  possible  question  that  can  be  raised,  or  nearly  every  one,  it 
would  seem,  has  been  raised  in  court ;  but  one  after  another  these  objections 
have  been  eliminated,  until  now  the  law  has  got  into  a  position  where,  if  the 
people  will,  they  can  execute  it.  That  is  the  question — whether  they  will 
or  not. 

72 


570  APPENDIX. 

I  think,  in  regard  to  this  matter,  (for  I  have  no  very  particular  statements 
to  make,)  that  the  men  who  had  been  active  men  in  the  temperance  cause, 
who  had  done  more  than  any  others  to  produce  this  state  of  feeling  in  the 
community,  (if  I  may  express  it  in  this  way,)  when  this  law  was  passed,  lay 
over  upon  it.  They  seemed  to  have  an  idea  that  the  law  would  execute 
itself.  I  think  they  made  a  great  mistake.  I  think  the  various  attempts 
which  were  made  to  resist  its  operation,  whenever  there  was  a  thorough  effort 
to  enforce  it,  were  obstacles  in  the  "way  of  its  execution.  I  think,  again,  that 
the  law  was  not  executed  as  it  should  have  been  executed,  from  the  fact  that 
the  men  who  undertook  to  execute  it  looked  to  the  citizens  to  become  informers. 
Like  any  other  law,  it  is  the  business  of  the  men  who  have  charge  of  the 
police  to  execute  it,  and  not  to  go  to  the  citizens  and  make  informers  of  them. 
That  is  where  I  think  people  have  made  a  mistake.  They  say,  "  You  temper- 
ance men  should  execute  the  law."  It  is  the  business  of  the  men  appointed 
by  the  proper  authorities  to  be  the  guardians  of  the  social  state  to  execute  the 
law,  and  they  have  no  business  to  roll  that  responsibility  off  upon  anybody 
else.  Another  reason  why  it  has  not  been  executed  is  because  we  have  not 
been  impartial.  The  good  book  says,  "  My  ways  are  equal ;  your  ways  are 
not  equal."  We  have  attempted  to  execute  the  law  by  going  down  into  Ann 
Street  and  taking  up  the  little  rum-sellers,  instead  of  making  the  law  so  ope- 
rate that  there  should  be  no  distinction  of  persons  or  places.  I  think  that  has 
been  one  of  the  faults.  I  think  that  has  arisen,  not  so  much  from  a  want  of 
moral  conviction  of  the  justness  of  the  law,  as  from  moral  cowardice  on  the 
part  of  the  people  in  regard  to  making  that  law  what  it  ought  to  be,  and 
enforcing  it  equally.  This  community,  or  any  community,  may  have  a  moral 
conviction  which  sustains  a  law,  which  holds  it  to  be  right,  and  yet  there  may 
be  a  fear  that  it  is  not  quite  right  for  me  or  for  any  one  to  do  anything  in  the 
execution  of  it,  and  thus  the  law  may  be  paralyzed. 

In  the  town  where  I  have  resided  since  1860, — Williamstown, — which  I 
have  known  for  forty  years,  there  were  some  five  or  six  barns  burned  during 
the  summer  of  the  first  year  I  was  there.  There  were  two  or  three  bad  secret 
places — apparently  secret — but  there  were  one  or  two  men  with  nerve  enough 
to  take  the  risk  of  having  their  barns  burned,  and  they  broke  them  up,  and 
now  there  is  not  more  than  one  place  where  liquor  is  sold,  and  there  is  a  ques- 
tion about  that.  But  this  should  be  said  :  we  are  a  border  town  ;  it  is  not  a 
great  ways  to  Troy,  and  it  is  not  a  great  ways  to  Pittsfield.  I  don't  know 
how  much  comes  in  on  the  railroad,  but  the  people,  as  compared  with  what 
they  were  when  I  was  in  college,  thirty-four  years  ago,  are  a  temperate  peo- 
ple— -the  farmers  and  business  men  ;  and  in  our  community  (we  are  a  country 
people,  of  course),  a  man  would  be  discredited  who  should  offer  wine  to  his 
neighbors  at  the  choicest  dinner  he  could  get  up.  It  is  not  so  here,  but  it  is 
there. 

Q.    In  the  exercise  of  your  duties,  you  go  about  the  State  a  good  deal  ? 

A.     Considerably,  sir. 

Q.  Is  not  the  feeling  very  strong  in  favor  of  the  law,  and  in  favor  of  its 
enforcement  ?  Is  not  the  inquiry  made,  "  Why  don't  they  enforce  it  down 
in  Boston  ?  "  and  in  various  parts  of  the  State  ? 

A.     I  hear  that  question  put,  sir,  very  often  indeed. 


APPENDIX.  571 

Q.  Do  they  not  take  a  great  deal  of  courage  from  the  operation  of  the 
State  Constabulary  ? 

A.  I  hear  them  everywhere  spoken  in  favor  ofj  except  that  once  in  a  "while 
I  hear  it.  whispered  that  some  gentleman  of  that  staff  is  so  very  polite  as  to 
give  notice  to  the  rum-sellers  the  day  before  he  calls  on  them  officially.  I 
have  heard  of  one  or  two  instances  of  that  kind.  As  a  general  thing,  I  think 
they  are  relied  upon. 

Q.  Do  they  not  have  more  hope  now  than  they  have  had  for  a  good  while 
of  its  enforcement  ? 

A.     I  think  so,  from  what  I  hear  and  see. 

Q.  Have  you  any  remarks  to  make  on  this  subject,  as  connected  with  the 
education  of  the  people  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  the  Board  which  I  serve  confines  itself  exclusively  to  its 
proper  work,  and  I,  as  their  servant,  confine  myself  to  it  as  exclusively  as  I 
can.  I  have  never  allowed  myself  to  speak  on  any  subject  that  was  before 
the  Legislature  here,  and  I  should  not  now,  if  I  had  not  been  invited  by  you, 
sir,  or  by  the  Committee.  I  deal  with  the  children  of  the  Commonwealth, 
and  I  believe  it  is  important  that  there  should  be  no  place  of  temptation  for 
children.  So  far  as  I  am  concerned,  therefore,  I  should  be  opposed  to  having 
anything  done  which  would  lend  the  slightest  shade  of  additional  respect  to 
this  business,  or  make  the  obtaining  of  liquor  any  more  easy  than  it  is  now. 

Q.  You  have  seen,  perhaps,  the  plan  of  a  law  which  has  been  presented 
by  the  petitioners  ? 

A.  I  have  heard  it  spoken  of.  I  read  it  the  morning  after  it  was  presented 
here,  and  it  was  shown  to  me  this  morning.  As  I  understand  it,  the  main  part 
of  it  is  in  the  first  section,  which  proposes  that  each  municipality  shall  settle 
the  question  entirely  for  itself.  I  have  some  objections  to  that,  if  gentlemen 
will  excuse  me  for  expressing  them.  One  is,  that  it  ceases  to  be  a  State  law. 
I  believe  that  in  all  matters  of  this  kind,  our  ways,  as  I  have  said,  should  be 
equal.  It  ceases  to  be  a  State  law,  and  is  simply  a  permission  to  every  town  to 
settle  this  matter  for  itself.  We,  in  Williamstown,  would  vote  not  to  have  it. 
No  man  could  be  elected  there,  with  a  college  on  our  hands,  who  was  not 
opposed  to  it.  But  if  the  selectmen  of  the  town  of  Adams,  four  and  a  half 
miles  off,  should  vote  to  allow  places  to  be  opened,  those  of  our  people  who 
go  to  North  Adams  to  market  would,  perhaps,  make  more  frequent  visits. 
They  would  get  their  liquor  there.  You  may  have  one  town  temperate  and 
another  intemperate.  While  an  annual  discussion  keeps  the  matter  before 
the  people  and  makes  excitement,  it  makes  an  unpleasant  excitement,  as 
everybody  knows.  It  strikes  me  that  the  question  of  giving  power  to  the 
selectmen  to  execute  the  law,  as  it  stands,  opens  a  sufficiently  broad  field  for 
discussion,  and  all  that  we  need. 

Q.  Would  you  not  consider  it  unjust  for  one  town  to  set  up  these  places 
when  another  town  on  its  border  refuses  to  allow  them  2 

A.    It  would  be  unpleasant. 

Q.     Would  it  not  nullify  the  law  ? 

A.  Certainly.  Whether  it  would  be  unjust  or  not  would  depend  upon  the 
law.  We  find  that  the  men  who  want  to  drink  in  our  town  slip  across  the 
line.  Our  neighbors  in  Vermont  allow  one  or  two  places  to  be  kept  there. 


572  APPENDIX. 

I  mean  the  lower  class  of  men, — the  imported  men,  who  have  not  money 
enough  to  send  to  Troy  for  it. 

A.  One  other  question.  This  plan  of  a  bill  contemplates  the  giving 
of  licenses  every  year  by  each  municipality,  if  they  see  fit,  and  changing  them 
every  year.  Aside  from  its  inequality  and  injustice  toward  those  towns 
which  do  not  want  liquor  and  vote  not  to  have  it,  would  not  that  raise  up  a 
multitude  of  legal  questions  that  it  would  be  impossible  ever  to  settle  ?  You 
say  it  will  take  fifteen  or  twenty  years  to  get  this  law  all  fixed  and  established. 
Would  there  not  be  a  number  of  questions  raised  under  this  law,  so  numerous 
and  so  complicated  as  to  be  altogether  beyond  settlement  ? 

A.  I  understand  that  this  plan  contemplates  leaving  the  present  law  in 
force  against  all  those  who  do  not  get  licenses.  I  do  not  see,  therefore,  how  it 
could  raise  any  legal  questions,  so  far  as  that  class  of  persons  arc  concerned. 
If  any  new  questions  are  to  be  raised,  they  are  to  be  raised  on  modifications 
of  the  law.  I  should  look  upon  it  in  that  light. 

Q.     I  mean  where  they  do  license  ? 

A.  Of  course  there  would  be  questions,  unless  they  could  go  back  to  the 
old  decisions,  when  we  had  license  laws.  My  ground  of  objection  to  the  law 
is  not  that  so  much  as  the  fact  that  we  do  not  want  three  hundred  and  thirty- 
four  independent  States  in  Massachusetts  to  settle  questions  of  this  kind ;  and 
I  want  selectmen  elected,  as  far  as  possible,  in  reference  to  the  ordinary  duties 
of  selectmen.  I  have  always  been  in  favor  of  keeping  this  question,  as  far  as 
possible,  out  of  the  region  of  every-day,  common,  town,  State  or  national  pol- 
itics. I  never  have  been  disposed  to  carry  it  into  politics,  except  when  it 
was  necessary  in  order  to  get  the  law  strong. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SHERMAN.)  You  think  the  best  interests  of  the  town  in 
other  respects  might  be  overlooked  by  regarding  simply  this  ? 

A.  There  would  be  likely  to  be  a  fight,  for  there  is  a  strong  anti-temper- 
ance feeling  in  many  towns.  In  my  town  it  was  settled  forty  years  ago ; 
every  person  who  has  sold  liquor  there  since  has  sold  it  illicitly ;  but  there 
are  other  towns  where  this  question  would  come  up  continually.  If  there  is  a 
majority  in  the  Commonwealth  in  favor  of  any  particular  action,  I  am  in  favor 
of  that  majority  putting  their  views  upon  the  statute  book,  and  letting  them 
stand  as  the  law  of  the  State. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  You  say  that  you  object  to  the  towns  being  inde- 
pendent of  the  State  and  of  each  other  in  respect  to  this  particular  kind  of 
police  regulation — making  three  hundred  and  thirty-four  independencies  in 
the  Commonwealth.  Is  it  for  that  reason  you  desire  that  the  State  should 
undertake  to  regulate  the  action  of  the  towns  ? 

A.     That  is  one  reason,  and  an  important  reason  in  my  mind. 

Q.  Then  you  desire  that  the  State  should  undertake  to  regulate  the  action 
of  the  people  in  respect  of  buying,  selling,  and  consuming  liquor  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  think  if  a  majority  of  the  people  are  in  favor  of  any  par- 
ticular law  in  reference  to  this  subject,  as  in  reference  to  any  other,  its  place 
is  in  the  statute  book. 

Q.  As  this  is  a  matter  which  relates,  not  to  the  action  of  the  citizen  con- 
cerning the  person  or  property  of  his  neighbor,  but  relates  only  to  the  action 
of  the  citizen  concerning  himself,  his  own  conduct,  why  would  not  the  same 


APPENDIX.  573 

rule  logically  carry  you  to  the  extent  of  requiring  the  Commonwealth  to 
destroy  the  independence  of  the  families  of  the  State,  and  introduce  the 
legislation  of  Sparta  ? 

A.  My  own  view  is  this:  The  family  is  an  institution  of  God  from  the 
beginning,  and  the  object  of  the  State  is  to  take  care  of  the  family.  The 
town  is  an  institution  of  the  State ;  it  is  its  creation ;  it  is  not  an  original 
institution ;  and  the  State  may  go  on  and  take  away  from  the  town  any  rights 
which  it,  as  a  State,  deems  best  for  the  general  good.  But  I  go  further,  and 
state  that  I  do  not  admit  your  premise.  I  do  not  admit  that  this  deals  solely 
with  the  individual.  We  put  the  drunkard  into  prison  because  his  drinking 
injures  the  family,  destroys  his  producing  power,  and  tends  to  make  a  pauper 
of  him.  My  theory  in  regard  to  this  law  is  just  this  :  that  the  law  is  intended 
to  prevent,  (and  I  say  I  think  it  does  in  some  measure  prevent,)  such  practices 
in  the  community  as  have  been  proved,  by  universal  experience,  to  injure  the 
State — to  produce  pauperism,  to  produce  crime — and  for  that  reason  the  State 
has  a  right  to  take  hold  of  it ;  it  is  within  its  legitimate  path ;  and,  in  doing 
so,  it  does  not  interfere  with  the  private  opinions  of  myself  or  of  my  friend, 
the  governor. 

Q.  Does  this  prohibitory  law,  against  which  the  petitioners  are  here 
moving,  constitute  drunkenness,  for  the  first  time,  an  offence  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Therefore,  the  misuse  or  abuse  of  a  certain  article  of  commerce  was 
recognized  and  punished  by  law  before  this  one  was  made  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Has  this  law,  then,  any  effect  towards  preventing  that  abuse,  other 
than  as  it  is  an  attempt  to  make  it  exceedingly  difficult  and  inconvenient  for 
people,  in  the  exercise  of  their  own  freedom  of  judgment,  to  procure  a  certain 
commercial  article  ? 

A.    It  makes  it  very  inconvenient,  and  that  is  one  object  of  the  law. 

Q.  To  make  it  more  inconvenient  for  the  people  of  Massachusetts  to  obtain 
an  article  of  commerce  ? 

A.  My  own  view  with  regard  to  it  was,  (I  am  a  younger  man  than  Judge 
Crosby,  who  grew  up  in  this  movement,)  that  the  body  of  the  people,  certainly 
in  this  State,  felt  that  to  conduct  a  business  the  natural  and  direct  tendency 
of  which  was  to  produce  drunkenness,  out  of  which  flow  so  many  evils,  was 
in  itself  a  sufficient  ground  of  offence  to  put  it  under  the  ban  of  the  law  to  a 
certain  extent.  This  matter  has  been  the  subject  of  regulation  from  the 
earliest  time.  Our  Puritan  fathers  used  to  send  a  man  with  a  long  pole 
through  the  streets  at  nine  o'clock,  to  shut  up  the  places  where  "  strong 
water "  was  sold.  So  far  as  that  precedent  is  concerned,  I  understand  that 
the  present  proposed  modification  does  not  take  the  law  from  under  it.  We 
propose  to  do  just  what  the  fathers  did — to  regulate  it.  You  propose  to  do 
that. 

Q.  Then  you  regard  this  law  as  advantageous  in  two  respects.  First,  it  is 
advantageous  because  it  makes  it  exceedingly  inconvenient  for  the  citizen  to 
obtain  a  certain  commercial  article ;  and,  secondly,  because  it  bears  a  moral 
testimony  ? 


574  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  think  that  is  one  reason.  I  think  it  expresses  the  moral  sentiment  of 
the  people. 

Q.     Is  the  law  satisfactory  in  that  respect  ? 

A.     I  think  it  is  satisfactory  to  the  majority  of  the  people. 

Q.  Is  it  to  yourself  and  the  class  of  men  who  agree  with  you  in  sentiment, 
satisfactory  in  that  respect,  as  a  preacher  of  righteousness  ? 

A.    I  think  it  is,  in  the  main  ;  as  far  as  it  preaches. 

Q.     Arc  you  satisfied  with  it  as  ifc  stands  ? 

A .    I  should  like  to  have  it  more  thoroughly  executed. 

Q.  I  mean,  are  you  satisfied  with  the  law  as  it  stands  upon  the  statute 
book? 

A.  I  am  satisfied  with  the  principle  of  the  law.  I  may  not  be  familiar 
with  all  its  details,  because  I  have  not  spent  any  time  in  studying  it. 

Q.  [Reading.]  "  The  County  Commissioners  and  the  Mayor  and  Alder- 
men of  the  city  of  Boston,  on  the  first  Monday  of  May  annually,  or  as  soon 
thereafter  as  practicable,  may  authorize  such  persons  as  apply  to  them  in 
writing,  to  manufacture  spirituous  or  intoxicating  liquors  at  places  within 
their  respective  jurisdictions,  and  to  sell  the  same  in  quantities  not  less  than 
thirty  gallons,  to  be  exported  or  to  be  used  in  the  arts  or  for  mechanical  and 
chemical  purposes  in  this  State,  and  such  authority  shall  continue  for  the  term 
of  one  year  from  the  time  thereof,  unless  sooner  revoked  for  cause,  or  annulled 
as  hereinafter  provided."  (5ccf.  12.)  Is  that,  in  your  opinion,  a  consistent 
testimony  in  behalf  of  moral  principle — that  persons  may  make  these  intoxi- 
cating liquors  for  all  the  rest  of  creation,  and  poison  whoever  they  please  ? 

A.  I  don't  think  it  is,  Governor.  I  don't  know  that  anything  else  can  be 
substituted  in  its  place  that  is  better,  but  I  don't  think  that  provision  is  a 
particularly  strong  moral  testimony  against  selling  liquor  or  manufacturing  it. 

Q.  Then  the  law  recedes,  does  it  not,  from  its  high  stand-point  of  being  a 
moral  testimony  in  behalf  of  moral  principle,  and  confines  itself  to  the 
original  position  which  I  first  mentioned,  that  of  attempting  to  make  it 
exceedingly  inconvenient  for  the  citizen  to  obtain  a  commercial  article  ? 

A.    It  does  in  that  respect 

Q.     Is  there  anything  else  that  occurs  to  you  as  objectionable  ? 

A.    I  have  not  read  the  law. 

Q.     Are  you  in  favor  of  drinking  wine  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Under  any  circumstances  ? 

A.  Well,  I  don't  believe  that  wine  is  necessary;  I  am  not  in  favor  of  it. 
I  should  drink  it  at  the  communion,  if  offered  to  me,  without  inquiring  as  to 
the  quality. 

Q.     You  don't  regard  fermented  wine  as  objectionable  ? 

A.    Not  in  that  respect. 

Q.    When  used  for  the  sacred  commemorative  service  ? 

A.  If  you  will  allow  me  to  state,  my  whole  ground  of  action  ever  has 
been,  in  regard  to  temperance  and  intemperance,  total  abstinence  from  the 
use  of  intoxicating  drinks  as  a  beverage.  I  don't  believe  in  them  "  as  a  steady 
drink,"  as  the  common  expression  is ;  and  my  strong  ground  in  favor  of  total 
abstinence  (for  when  I  was  a  young  man,  I  listened  to  all  those  discussions, 


APPENDIX.  575 

and  mingled  in  them,)  was  not  so  much  that  a  single  glass  of  wine  was  objec- 
tionable, as  the  other  ground,  which  was  always  satisfactory  to  me,  and  I 
think  that  is  the  ground  on  which  a  majority  of  the  people  have  acted,  that  it 
was  found  to  be  utterly  impossible  to  induce  men  who  loved  whiskey  to  stop 
whiskey-drinking  from  the  lips  of  men  who  loved  wine  and  drank  wine  ;  and 
therefore,  to  be  consistent,  we  must  take  the  principle  of  St.  Paul  on  that  subject. 
I  remember  a  most  thorough  discussion  on  this  subject  which  took  place  at  Sar- 
atoga Springs,  between  Bishop  Potter,  one  of  the  noblest  men  that  ever  lived, 
and  Governor  Briggs — one  in  favor  of  total  abstinence  and  the  other  opposed 
to  it.  Bishop  Potter  was  then  a  distinguished  Professor  at  Union  College.  He 
was  conscientious  in  the  position  he  took — believed  in  it.  Subsequently,  he 
wrote  a  letter  to  some  gentlemen  in  Boston,  which  I  read  more  than  twenty 
years  ago,  in  which  he  said  that  he  found  he  could  not  preach  temperance 
effectively  to  the  students  of  Union  College  so  long  as  they  knew  that  he 
drank  wine ;  and  therefore,  although  he  believed  that  the  Bible  sanctioned 
the  use  of  wine,  he  abandoned  it,  to  give  his  teachings  higher  moral  power. 
It  is  on  that  ground  that  I  have  been  in  favor  of  total  abstinence. 

Q.  That  is  a  matter  of  personal  observation  and  conviction ;  but  you  do 
not  mean  to  say  that  that  is  a  principle  upon  which  criminal  legislation  should 
be  based,  do  you  ? 

A.  I  think  that  criminal  legislation  is  based  upon  substantially  the  same 
thing.  It  is  on  the  general  observation  of  the  fact  that  to  open  places  to 
tempt  the  young  and  unwary,  or  to  make  it  easy  for  those  who  have  acquired 
the  habit  of  drinking  to  get  liquor,  to  give  it  a  sort  of  respectability,  to 
insinuate  liquor  through  the  social  nature  of  man,  is  an  evil.  I  think  that  is 
the  evil  of  dram-selling,  and  the  main  object  of  the  law,  I  suppose,  was  to  stop 
that. 

Q.     The  main  object  was  to  stop  dram-selling  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir.    I  class  under  that  jug-selling. 

Q.  You  are  not  opposed  to  a  law  allowing  anybody  who  pleases  to  sell 
to  the  deacon,  with  an  understanding  how  he  is  going  to  use  it  ? 

A.  No,  and  I  think  that  is  provided  for  by  law.  But  I  don't  want  the 
deacon  to  go  to  a  store  where  the  boys  will  get  round  and  take  a  drink  at  his 
expense,  and  laugh  at  him  when  his  back  is  turned. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  the  law  which  forbids  everybody,  except  State 
Agents,  selling  wine,  allows  everybody  to  sell  the  same  wine  to  the  deacon  for 
sacramental  purposes  ?  That,  you  understand,  to  be  the  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  I  believe  it  is. 

Q.  Therefore,  I  again  ask  you,  if  you  think  this  law  is  itself  so  commend- 
able as  a  preacher  of  an  abstract  rule  of  righteousness,  when  it  allows  men 
to  sell  an  article  to  anybody,  upon  the  understanding  that  he  is  to  devote 
it  to  a  particular  social,  yet  sacred,  purpose,  while  at  the  same  time  it  forbids 
them  to  sell  to  anybody  for  any  other  purpose  ? 

A.  Well,  I  think  that  so  far  as  the  law  restricts  it  to  that  good  purpose,  it 
is  so  far  good. 

Q.  Then  you  admit  that  it  is  properly  useable  in  the  celebration  of  the 
sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  ? 


576  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  have  never  taken  the  ground  that  others  have,  that  the  use  of  wine 
at  the  communion  table  is  wrong.  I  should  prefer  using  the  unfermented 
wine. 

Q.     And  the  law  does  not  take  that  ground  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  You  alluded,  in  your  testimony-in-chief,  to  the  fact  of  the  existence  of 
a  highly  commendable  and  satisfactory  moral  condition  in  respect  to  sobriety 
in  your  own  favored  town  of  Williamstown  ? 

A.  I  did  not  use  the  word  "favored ;  "  but  it  is,  in  that  respect,  somewhat 
favored,  although  it  had  great  disadvantages.  There  was  more  drunkenness 
in  the  town,  when  I  first  knew  it,  than  in  any  town  I  ever  knew.  At  the 
present  time,  I  do  not  know  of  a  man  in  Williamstown  who  is  a  drunkard. 
All  our  farming  population,  except  one  or  two,  who  came  down  from  the  old 
generations,  now  sixty  or  seventy  years  of  age,  are  temperance  men. 

Q.  And  you  are  not  sure  there  is  any  place  in  town  where  liquor  can  be 
obtained  ? 

A.    I  don't  know  of  one  in  our  town,  except  the  apothecary. 

Q.  But  you  think  they  sell  it  over  the  line,  both  in  New  York  and  in 
Vermont  ? 

A.  They  don't  sell  it  in  the  border  towns  over  the  line  in  New  York,  but 
Troy  is  only  about  thirty  miles  distant  from  us  by  rail. 

Q.  How  is  it  in  North  Adams  ?  Don't  rum  run  pretty  freely  in^  North 
Adams  ? 

A.  I  have  heard  so.  Judge  Robinson  is  here,  and  he  can  testify  as  to 
that. 

Q.     Then,  on  three  sides,  your  people  have  pretty  free  trade  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir.     That  is  to  say,  on  two  sides*  certainly,  they  can  find  it. 

Q.  And  unless  North  Adams  has  changed  very  much  recently,  it  is  so 
there  ? 

A.    I  shouldn't  wonder. 

Q.  Then,  on  three  sides  of  your  town,  liquor  can  be  bought  by  everybody 
whenever  they  please  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     And  that  has  always  been  so  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  yet,  in  spite  of  that,  your  people  have  been  brought  up  to  their 
present  condition  of  temperance  and  sobriety.  Now,  what  has  done  it  ? 

A.  In  the  first  place,  with  reference  to  your  statement,  there  are  Only  two 
sides  of  the  town  on  which  the  poor  drunkard  can  get  anything,  if  he  can  get 
it  at  Adams,  because  the  border  towns  in  New  York  are  more  free  from  it 
and  more  strongly  temperate  than  Williamstown  itself;  and  that  which  has 
brought  temperance  up  there  has  been  the  strong  public  sentiment  which  has 
gone  out  from  the  people  of  that  town  in  favor  of  abstinence  from  drink. 

Q.     The  education  of  the  minds  of  the  people  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    And  encouraging  them  to  pursue  a  better  way  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 


APPENDIX.  577 

Q.  And  that  has  been  the  success  of  your  people  in  Williamstown  thus 
far? 

A.  We  were  very  early  favored  In  that  respect.  I  remember  attending  a 
town  meeting  as  many  as  thirty-three  years  ago,  where  this  question  of 
licensing  came  up,  and  it  was  discussed  with  tremendous  energy  from  midday 
until  night,  and  finally  settled  against  it.  They  agreed  to  license  one  man, 
and  that  was  the  celebrated  geological  professor,  Dr.  Emmons,  of  that 
town,  to  sell  to  anybody  he  saw  fit ;  and  I  remember  he  said,  "  I  won't  have 
the  cursed  thing  in  my  house.  I  don't  see  fit  to  sell  it  to  anybody ;  it  isn't 
fit  for  anybody  to  have.  Nobody  wants  it ;  it  won't  do  anybody  any  good, 
and  I  won't  have  it."  That  settled  the  question.  There  has  been  no  attempt 
to  get  a  license  since. 

Q.  Whatever  the  law  in  Massachusetts  may  be,  so  far  as  geographical 
position  is  concerned,  the  town  of  Williamstown  would  always  be  exposed  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  she  depends  upon  the  moral  force  and  intelligence  of  her  people 
to  resist  the  temptation  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  depending  upon  that  moral  force  and  moral  education  and  intel- 
ligence of  her  citizens,  she  has  risen  to  what  she  is  ? 

A .  Yes,  sir.  I  think  it  is  proper  to  state  that,  depending  upon  that  moral 
force,  she  has  absolutely  excluded  the  sale  of  rum,  as  far  as  she  could.  That 
exclusion  she  has  used  as  an  instrument  for  thirty-three  years. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  know  whether  two  of  the  faculty  of  Wil- 
liams College  have  been  appointed  a  committee  to  prosecute  under  this  law  ? 

A.  I  know  that  one  has.  He  has  always  been  the  efficient  man,  who  has 
had  nerve  enough  to  drive  that  matter  through. 

Q.  Gov.  Andrew  has  called  your  attention  to  that  section  of  the  law  which 
permits  the  manufacture  of  the  article  and  its  importation  to  other  States,  and 
asked  your  judgment  of  its  propriety  and  consistency  ? 

A.  I  think  he  asked  iny  judgment  whether  it  was  a  perfect  expression  of 
the  moral  sentiment  of  the  Commonwealth. 

Q.  Put  it  in  that  shape  if  you  please ;  but  allow  me  to  ask  you  another 
question.  You  know  that  a  large  portion  cf  the  liquor  manufactured  in  this 
country  is  used  in  the  arts,  I  suppose  ? 

A.    I  suppose  so ;  I  don't  know. 

Q.  It  was  testified  by  Mr.  Derby  the  other  day,  that  he  was  on  a  com- 
mission at  Washington,  and  they  found  that  more  than  half  the  alcohol  and 
the  various  kinds  of  whiskey  manufactured  in  this  country,  was  used  in  the 
arts.  I  suppose  you  do  not  disapprove  of  its  use  for  that  purpose  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  do  not  disapprove  of  its  use  in  the  arts.  I  do  not  disapprove? 
for  I  do  not  pretend  to  know  anything  about  it.  In  the  line  of  medicine,  if  a 
physician  directed  me  to  take  it,  I  should  take  it ;  and  I  will  say,  that  if  I  was 
attacked  in  the  night  with  cholic,  and  could  get  hold  of  some  brandy,  I  should 
take  it,  if  I  supposed  it  would  do  me  good. 

Q.     You  admit  the  propriety  of  its  use  in  the  arts  and  for  medicine,  and  it 
has  been  testified  that  more  than-  half  the  quantity  manufactured  in  this 
73 


578  APPENDIX. 

country  is  used  in  the  arts.  It  is  right  and  proper  to  manufacture  and  sell  it 
for  those  purposes,  of  course  ? 

A.     I  do  not  doubt  that. 

Q.  Then  does  not  that,  in  your  view,  make  it  proper  for  Massachusetts  to 
allow  its  manufacture  to  be  sent  into  other  States,  and  take  its  chances 
whether  it  shall  be  used  in  the  arts  or  otherwise,  leaving  it  to  those  States  to 
regulate  its  sale  and  use  as  they  may  think  proper  ? 

A.  It  may  be  best,  on  the  whole;  as  a  matter  of  expediency,  to  make  a  law 
of  that  kind ;  but  I  do  not  quite  see  the  moral  effect  of  sending  it  into  another 
State,  any  more  than  I  do  of  sending  it  from  one  town  to  another. 

Q.  You  cannot  suppose  that  the  State  of  Massachusetts  can  control  the 
distribution  of  it  for  various  purposes  in  other  States  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    It  is  legal  and  proper  to  manufacture  it,  is  it  not,  Mr.  White  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Of  course,  it  must  be  manufactured  by  somebody  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     On  the  whole,  can  you  see  any  better  way  to  do  it  ? 

A.  I  cannot  see  any  better  way  to  do  it.  I  wish  to  be  understood  that  I 
base  my  objection  to  the  license  system  on  the  ground  that  I  think  the  pro- 
hibitory system  will  take  liquor  more  effectually  out  of  the  way  of  tempting 
people  to  drink  it.  I  do  not  go  into  the  metaphysics  of  the  thing  at  all. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  E.  P.  MARVIN,  D.  D. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  MINER.)     You  are  editor  of  the  Boston  Recorder,  are  you  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Where  is  your  residence  ? 

A.    InMedford. 

Q.     Your  business  is  in  Boston  ? 

A.    In  Boston. 

Q.     You  are  a  member  of  the  Trinitarian  Congrcgationalist  order  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir  ;  and  my  paper  is  a  denominational  paper. 

Q.  Your  paper  takes  what  ground  on  the  subject  under  discussion  here, 
and  under  some  general  discussion  ?  You  may  state  your  views  and  those  of 
your  church  and  patrons  on  this  subject  ? 

A.  We  take  the  ground  that  the  prohibition  of  the  sale  of  liquor  for  a 
beverage  is  exactly  what  is  desirable,  or  rather  that  the  licensing  of  the  sale, 
so  that  it  may  be  used  for  drinking  purposes,  is  an  immorality ',  that  is,  that 
there  is  a  great  moral  question  at  the  foundation  of  it,  agitating  the  churches 
of  the  several  denominations  and  the  masses  of  the  people  to  such  an  extent 
that  it  can  never  be  settled,  in  my  judgment,  until  the  responsibility  is  taken 
off  from  the  people  ;  and  our  objection  to  the  license  is  this,  mainly :  that  it 
takes  the  moral  responsibility  off  from  the  individuals,  in  a  measure,  and  lays 
it  upon  the  whole  people.  That  is  the  very  thing  that  the  churches  and  the 
people  will  never  endure.  If  a  man  sells  to  his  neighbor,  who  drinks  and 
injures  himself,  the  man  who  sells  has  that  responsibility  himself,  and  he  is 
accountable  to  the  law.  Whether  the  law  is  enforced  or  not,  he  is  responsi- 
ble ;  but  the  moment  we  enact  a  license  lav/  we  say  for  so  much  money  we 


APPENDIX.  579 

will  take  the  responsibility — the  moral  guilt,  if  you  please — of  that  man's 
sales ;  so  that  it  becomes  with  all  the  churches  a  simple  question  of  morality; 
and  the  moral  idea,  the  question  of  morality,  weighs  like  a  world  upon  the  State 
as  soon  as  it  becomes  stirred  and  agitated.  I  believe  it  was  a  moral  idea  that 
gave  power  to  the  Revolution  ;  a  moral  idea  underlying  the  question,  so  that 
they  would  not  endure  the  Stamp  Act.  And  there  was  a  moral  idea  that  sus- 
tained the  people  in  the  last  war.  And  so  it  is  in  this.  We  feel  that  we  will 
never  bear  the  responsibility  which  now  lies  upon  those  who  sell  for  drinking 
purposes.  We  advocate  that  in  our  paper,  and  when  questions  come  up  which 
have  been  brought  up  here,  which  are  questions  of  casuistry,  we  think  that 
the  masses  of  the  people  strike  through  them  at  once  to  the  principal  fact. 
They  say  that  when  there  is  a  license  there  is  an  encouragement  of  the  sale 
more  or  less  general ;  and  that  sale,  more  or  less  general,  is  always  evil  and 
always  ruinous  to  many,  and  there  is  a  responsibility  somewhere.  Now,  then, 
if  the  State  enacts  that  the  people,  the  churches  and  the  ministers,  and  the 
different  classes  of  people  are  to  bear  this  responsibility  (for  we  constitute 
a  part  of  the  State,  and  their  Legislature  represents  us),  we  say  that  we  never 
can  submit  to  the  idea  that  the  people  and  the  churches  shall  license  the  sale, 
where  it  is  known  to  be  used  with  such  deleterious  effect.  The  question  is 
often  answered  by  such  passages  of  Scripture  as  this.  It  was  said  in  Leviticus, 
that  if  an  ox  was  wont  to  push  with  his  horn,  and  his  owner  did  not  keep  him 
in,  so  that  he  gored  a  man  or  a  woman  that  they  died,  the  ox  should  be  killed 
and  the  owner  thereof  should  be  put  to  death.  Now  there  is  no  harm  in  the 
ox  being  in  the  street ;  but  when  it  becomes  known  to  the-  owner  that  he  may 
one  time  in  ten  thousand,  even,  destroy  or  injure  somebody,  if  he  does  not 
restrain  him  he  is  responsible  for  the  crime  of  murder.  In  case  a  man  should 
be  killed,  he  is  the  murderer.  Now,  in  this  case  it  has  become  known  to  the 
people,  and  it  is  preached  in  the  churches — and  there  is  a  unanimity  in  the 
churches,  or  of  a  large  majority  of  them,  on  this  question — that  the  sale  for 
drinking  purposes  is  sure  to  kill.  It  destroys  peace  among  families  ;  it  makes 
widows  and  orphans ;  it  fills  homes  with  tears  and  sorrow ;  and  there  is  a 
responsibility  somewhere.  Even  if  the  prohibitory  law  could  not  be  enforced, 
it  would  be  far  better  to  have  it  there  than  to  take  the  responsibility  off  from 
those  who  wish  to  sell,  and  put  it  upon  the  whole  of  us.  There  is  the  trouble, 
and  I  think  almost  anything  else  could  be  done  to  quiet  the  people  of  Massa- 
chusetts better  than  to  enact  a  license  law ;  simply,  on  that  ground.  They  had 
rather  leave  it  to  every  man  who  wants  to  sell  to  take  the  responsibility,  if  he 
will,  of  selling  and  destroying ;  but  not  put  it  on  the  people.  Another  reason 
why  I  am  strongly  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory  law,  and  have  advocated  it  in  my 
paper,  is  that  I  think  there  is  almost  a  universal  concurrence  among  the  mem- 
bers of  the  denomination  to  which  I  belong,  in  the  opinion  that  the  prohibi- 
tory law  ma}'  encourage  and  strengthen  morals.  I  believe  there  has  been  a 
reaction  or  falling  back  in  the  using  of  moral  means.  The  people  have  been 
discouraged  in  this  way.  They  say  you  have  come  to  us,  and  have  lectured 
to  us  and  have  brought  a  pledge  and  we  have  signed  it  a  hundred  times,  and 
yet  there  are  men  who  have  defeated  us.  Now,  they  say,  tell  us  something  to 
do  that  will  stop  our  children  and  the  young  people  of  our  congregation  from 
the  use  of  liquor,  and  we  will  go  on.  Signing  the  pledge  and  having  lectures 


580  APPENDIX. 

are  good  things ;  but  every  time  it  rolls  back  upon  the  same  trouble.  It  is 
like  Ixion,  rolling  a  stone  over  and  over,  forever.  There  is  no  cog  to  hold 
this  wheel.  The  people  demand  that  there  shall  be  a  law  such  that  when  we 
get  up  to  a  certain  extent,  instead  of  having  it  roll  back  and  the  law  have  no 
force,  the  law  may  be  able  to  hold  it.  I  think  that  if  we  had  a  law  only  one- 
half  as  strong  within  the  last  few  years,  which  would  have  sustained  public 
opinion,  that  we  should  have  gained  power  and  become  stronger  temperance 
people,  an  hundred-fold,  than  we  a"re  now.  As  to  the  enforcement  of  the 
law,  it  is  known,  I  suppose,  that  when  the  law  was  passed,  in  a  great  many 
towns  of  the  Commonwealth,  it  was  easy  to  enforce  it ;  and  in  my  belief  those 
who  did  sell,  did  close  up  their  shops,  and  they  would  do  so  again  if  it  could 
become  common  ;  but  when  they  find  that  there  is  any  other  place  resisting 
the  law,  they  will  continue  the  sale.  The  temperance  movement  lost,  per- 
haps, a  degree  of  moral  courage  and  force  by  this  change  of  affairs,  and  those 
who  were  accustomed  to  sell  became  emboldened,  and  they  went  back ;  but 
if  the  law  had  been  enforced,  and  if  there  had  been  no  question  to  be  carried 
up  in  the  courts,  I  think  it  would  have  been  enforced  quite  generally  through- 
out the  State. 

Q.  You  do  not  feel,  then,  on  the  whole,  any  discouragement  such  as  would 
incline  you  to  turn  back  from  prohibition  as  to  principle  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  do  not  at  all,  and  as  population  increases  and  foreign  popula- 
tion is  increased,  it  is  more  and  more  demanded,  for  there  is  a  class  of  people 
on  whom  moral  suasion  has  about  as  much  effect  as  water  poured  on  a  shark's 
back.  You  can  effect,  perhaps,  ninety-nine  hundredths,  but  the  law  will 
defeat  you,  unless  you  come  to  the  support  of  all. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  the  sentiment  of  the  people  to  be,  in  regard  to  the 
principle  that  the  license  law  will  restrain  the  sale  of  liquor.  Is  it  felt  that 
that  is  the  intention  of  those  who  advocate  that  law  ? 

A.  We  are  disposed  to  make  great  allowances  for  differences  of  opinion, 
but,  so  far  as  I  know,  the  people  can  hardly  make  up  their  minds  that  it  is 
possible  that  anybody  seriously  intends  by  a  license  law  really  to  restrain  the 
sale.  I  have  conversed  with  a  great  many  persons,  and  they  do  not  wish  to 
charge  bad  motives  to  anybody,  and  they  say  that  a  great  many  of  these 
persons  really  think  to  accomplish  something  by  such  a  law ;  and  yet  it  is  the 
toughest  question  for  them  to  satisfy  themselves  that  anybody  really  expects 
any  restraint  from  a  license  law.  I  received,  only  last  year,  three  letters  from 
persons  in  different  parts  of  the  State  (and  from  quite  representative  men  in 
different  classes  of  society  in  different  parts  of  the  State),  all  of  them  express- 
ing wonder  that  anybody  can  think  that  by  a  license  there  can  be  any 
restraint.  And  some  of  them  express  it  in  no  measured  terms,  and  I  think 
there  is  amazement  in  my  own  denomination  and  perfect  bewilderment  in 
reference  to  this  matter ;  and  it  is  very  rare  to  find  a  man  who  thinks  that  by 
a  license  law  there  can  be  any  real  intention  of  restraint  in  the  indulgence  of 
drink. 

Q.  And  any  claim  or  pretence  that  any  testimony  to  the  contrary  as 
representing  the  sentiment  of  your  people,  is  not  a  just  one  ? 

A.  It  is  utterly  repudiated  by  them.  We  have  done  it  by  whole  churches 
since  that  time ;  and  whole  associations  of  ministers,  since  there  has  been  such 


APPENDIX.  581 

an  imputation,  are  holding  meetings  and  passing  resolutions.  And  I  think  I 
am  safe  to  say  that  ninety-nine  out  of  every  hundred  would  join  in  passing 
these  resolutions. 

Q.     Would  you  feel  at  liberty  to  name  any  churches  ? 

A.  The  cliuich  in  South  Boston,  I  understand,  passed  such  resolutions.  I 
think  it  was  last  Sabbath. 

Q.    Rev.  Dr.  Alden's  church  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  after  a  slight  consultation  at  the  close  of  the  evening  meeting, 
some  persons  expressed  a  wonder  that  such  an  impression  could  have  been  got 
by  anybody,  and  wished  that  there  should  be  an  expression  on  the  part  of  the 
church.  And  some  expression  was  made  by  those  who  chose  to  remain  at  the 
meeting  ;  and  nearly  all  who  were  present  did  remain.  I  have  heard  of  one 
association  of  ministers  :  I  might  find  the  facts  ;  I  do  not  know  that  I  could 
give  the  names,  but  they  have  been  published  in  the  papers,  and  everybody 
can  see  them. 

Q.  What,  in  your  judgment,  is  the  effect  now  being  produced  throughout 
your  ranks  by  the  proceedings  here  V 

A.  There  is  a  wonderful  interest.  I  went  up  to  Andover  since  this  Com- 
mittee has  been  in  session,  having  an  errand  which  led  me  to  see  the  different 
professors  of  theology,  and  almost  the  first  tiling,  after  the  usual  'salutation, 
was,  "  What  in  the  world  arc  you  doing  in  Boston  ?  Are  you  really  mooting 
that  question  again  ?  "  And  I  had  to  go  into  an  explanation  in  every  place 
where  I  went,  I  believe  without  exception.  I  told  them  they  had  not  read  the 
testimony  from  the  other  side,  and  that,  so  far,  it  was  only  a  representation  of 
one  view.  And  so  I  have  found  it  in  various  places.  I  was  in  New  York  since 
that,  and  in  places  where  I  met  representative  gentlemen  among  those  who 
agree  with  us  in  religious  views,  and  I  found  many  looking  to  Boston  with 
great  anxiety  about  this  discussion.  They  will  be  influenced  very  much  by 
the  testimony  here.  I  think  the  testimony  is  doing  great  good.  It  is  arousing 
discussion  among  the  people,  and  bringing  out  information.  I  feel  a  pleasure 
that  those  who,  two  or  three  years  ago  were  somewhat  in  doubt  whether  it 
would  not  be  better  to  have  a  license  law,  have  changed  their  minds 
entirely. 

Q.  (By  MY.  ANDREW.)  Do  you  think  that  your  illustration  of  the 
untamed  ox  has  any  real  analogy  to  thc'matter  in  hand  ? 

A.     It  was  not  an  untamed  ox  in  the  first  place. 

Q.  Well,  a  wild,  misbehaving  ox,  at  any  rate.  Do  you  think  it  has  any 
real  analogy  to  the  matter  in  hand  ? 

A.     Certainly ;  I  think  it  has. 

Q.  The  object  of  shutting  up  the  ox  was  the  same  as  the  object  which  we 
undertake  to  accomplish  in  shutting  up  animals,  wild  by  nature,  wras  it  not  ? 

A.  I  understand  that  it  was  common  to  leave  oxen  to  run  in  the  streets 
and  there  was  no  harm  at  all  generally ;  and  there  was  no  moral  wrong  in  an 
ox  walking  the  streets :  but  when  it  is  known  that  he  is  liable  to  do  mischief, 
then  the  responsibility  comes  back  upon  the  owner  for  the  injury  that  he  does. 
So  I  say  in  regard  to  the  sale  and  use  of  liquor ;  that  it  is  known  that  the 
liquor  will  destroy,  and  that  even  if  it  is  only  known  that  it  will  destroy  in 
one  case  out  of  fifty,  whenever  it  does  destroy  the  responsibility  comes  back 


582  APPENDIX. 

upon  those  who  have  not  restrained  it.  It  is  nothing  that  they  have  not  done 
anything  about  it. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  the  liquor  itself  has  any  power  of  volition  or 
action  in  itself? 

A.  No,  sir ;  no  great  amount  unless  it  is  among  those  persons  who  are  so 
full  of  it  that  you  can  hardly  separate  them  from  the  liquor. 

Q.  I  put  the  question  because  you  undertook  to  make  an  analogy  between 
an  inanimate  object,  incapable  of  doing  any  harm  of  its  own  accord,  and  an 
animal  possessing  both  volition  and  active  powers. 

A.  I  did  not  attempt  any  such  thing.  I  attempted  to  show  an  analogy 
between  the  restraining  of  the  ox,  and  the  restraining  of  the  sale  of  liquor. 
It  is  simply  a  restraint  of  that  which  a  man  knows  will,  in  all  probability,  do 
evil. 

Q.  Now,  since  you  have  apparently  shifted  your  position  from  that  which  I 
understood  you  to  take,  let  me  address  you  upon  the  very  ground  you  at  this 
moment  occupy.  Do  you  understand  that  there  is  something  like  fifty 
millions  of  gallons  of  spirituous  liquors  of  one  sort  and  another  of  which 
alcohol  is  the  basis,  manufactured  and  sold  in  this  country  annually  for  man- 
ufacturing purposes  and  for  use  in  the  arts  ? 

A.    It  may  be  so. 

Q.     Well,  sir;  when  it  is  sold,  it  is  out  loose  in  the  community,  is  it  not  ? 

-•1.     It  is  out  in  the  community  in  casks,  I  suppose. 

Q.     Does  it  discourage  the  cause  at  all. 

A.     It  is  not  out  in  the  community,  if  we  have  a  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  But  your  prohibitory  law  allows  the  sale  of  just  these  very  dangerous 
oxen,  in  medicine  and  in  the  arts  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  the  prohibitory  law  restrains  it.  It  is  like  putting  a  hamper 
upon  it. 

Q.     Docs  it  restrain  the  use  after  it  is  sold  ? 

A.     It  restrains  it  in  the  State. 

Q.     In  the  State  after  it  is  sold  ? 

A.     It  is  not  sold  according  to  the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  Do  you  not  understand  that  your  own  prohibitory  law  authorizes  the 
sale  of  all  these  dangerous  oxen? 

A .     Never,  sir  ;  only  while  they  are  not  dangerous. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  it  does  not  authorize  the  sale  of  Medford 
rum  for  use  in  the  arts  ? 

A.    No,  sir;  I  do  not  say  that. 

Q.     Then  it  is  dangerous  for  use  in  the  arts  ? 

A.     Certainly  not. 

Q.  Then  the  danger  is  not  in  the  thing  itself ;  the  danger  is  in  a  perverted 
use  of  it  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Where,  then,  is  your  analogy  ? 

A.  The  danger  is  not  with  the  ox  ;  but  when  the  ox  gets  in  a  disposition 
to  make  himself  dangerous,  then  it  is  time  to  restrain  him. 

Q.  Is  there  any  difference  between  the  disposition  of  one  barrel  of 
whiskey  and  another  ? 


APPENDIX.  583 

A.    It  is  in  tlie  use  made  of  it. 

Q.    In  the  use  made  after  the  purchase  is  made  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  do  not  think  it  is  wholly  there  ;  I  think  that  is  simply  taking 
the  whole  force  of  the  restraint  from  it.  In  the  first  case,  I  think  it  would  be 
perfectly  right  to  sell  an  ox,  and  let  him  go  in  the  street  until  it  is  known  that 
he  probably  will  do  mischief.  In  certain  streets  and  certain  ways  where  peo- 
ple go,  or  entirely  at  large,  he  would  be  ruinous,  and  just  so  it  is  with  the 
restraining  of  liquor  in  some  streets  and  ways.  In  certain  other  streets  and 
ways  in  which  liquor  may  be  bought,  it  may  not  be  injurious ;  but  in  these 
streets  we  want  to  stop  it. 

Q.  That  is  to  say,  you  want  to  stop  the  perverting  of  the  use  of  a  thing 
•which  is  utterly  harmless  so  long  as  it  is  unperverted  ? 

A.  Simply  what  the  law  says  ;  we  wish  to  prevent  the  sale  for  intoxicat- 
ing purposes  and  for  beverages. 

Q,  That  is,  you  simply  wish  to  prevent  it  where  it  is  abusive  ?  Now,  then, 
your  analogy  ceases  plainly. 

A.  Take  another,  then.  Take  a  steam-boiler  which  becomes  unsafe;  we 
at  once  come  in  with  a  law,  not  preventing  the  use  of  steam-boilers,  but 
preventing  men  from  using  that  particular  boiler ;  not  preventing  the  use  of 
steam-boilers  in  general,  but  the  use  of  this  in  this  particular  way ;  and  saying 
that  a  man  shall  not  undertake  to  carry  a  train  over  a  road  with  an  engine 
that  has  that  steam-boiler,  although  that  boiler  may  be  very  good  for  some- 
thing else. 

Q.     That  is,  for  old  iron  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  for  old  iron  or  anything  of  that  kind ;  and  anywhere  where 
it  can  be  used  with  caution.  But  here  the  law  says  that  because  it  may  do 
harm,  it  shall  not  be  used.  So  here  we  want  to  say  that  drinking  usages  arc 
very  sure  to  run  the  train  off,  and  therefore  we  will  not  have  liquor  used. 

Q.  But  you  have  got  forty  or  fifty  millions  of  gallons  in  the  community, 
used  for  mechanical  purposes,  out  of  ninety  or  ninety-five  millions  of  gallons 
which  are  manufactured  annually  in  the  country.  It  is  in  the  community  and 
in  the  hands  of  people  of  all  descriptions ;  and  no  sort  of  artist  or  artisan,  of 
any  description,  who  does  not  use  it  in  some  form  or  other.  It  gets  pretty 
widely  spread  then,  does  it  not  ? 

A.  Would  you  take  the  ground  that  because  there  is  a  good  deal  of  this 
liquor  out  in  the  community  for  mechanical  purposes,  therefore  it  will  be  right 
to  open  places  of  temptation  for  the  young  ? 

Q.  I  will  put  the  question  back  to  you,  sir.  If  there  is  a  barrel  of  whiskey 
in  a  mechanic's  shop,  is  not  the  whiskey  itself  just  as  tempting  as  if  it  were 
somewhere  else  ? 

A.    No,  sir;  it  might  be  very  much  more  tempting  somewhere  else. 

Q.  Now,  do  you  question  that  there  is  a  considerable  amount  of  injurious 
drinking  from  the  use  of  ruin  and  whiskey  bought  of  the  State  Agent  for 
mechanical  purposes  ? 

A.     It  is  possible  that  it  may  be  sometimes,  abused. 

Q.    You  do  not  know  of  any  instances  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Then  is  it  the  ox  that  gores  ? 


584  APPENDIX. 

A.    It  is  the  ox  when  it  gores. 

Q.  It  is  the  man  that  gores  the  ox  and  not  the  ox  that  gores  the  man,  is  it 
not  ?  Do  you  not  find  that  the  sole  restraining  power  of  the  people  is  that 
which  we  have  to  rely  upon  at  the  last,  in  respect  to  the  use  of  liquor  ?  Is  it 
not  everwhere  throughout  the  community  in  some  form  or  other  ?  And  do 
we  not  have  to  depend  upon  the  judgment  and  the  sense  of  morality  and  the 
common  sense  of  the  people  ? 

A .  Precisely  as  in  anything  elsQ.  In  the  prevention  of  burglary,  I  would 
say  that  that  would  depend  very  much  upon  the  moral  sense  of  the  people  ; 
but  I  would  not  say  from  that,  that  we  must  not  have  a  stringent  law  to 
prohibit  it. 

Q.  The  analogy  would  apply  if  I  had  proposed  to  you  to  apply  the  laws 
against  drunkenness.  Now,  please  consider  the  very  question  I  put  to  you  : 
whether,  considering  the  fact  of  a  vast  volume  of  spirituous  liquor,  in  one 
form  or  another,  spread  out  over  the  country  and  in  the  hands  of  the  people, 
you  are  not  at  last,  in  spite  of  all  your  prohibitory  laws,  obliged  to  depend 
upon  morality  as  the  restraint  of  the  people  ? 

A.  I  said  that  the  prohibitory  law  would  help  us  in  giving  strength  to  the 
people.  They  lose  their  courage,  unless  we  have  the  help  of  law  as  we  do  in 
other  crimes. 

Q.     You  have  not  answered  my  question,  or  even  tried  ? 

A.  I  thought  I  was  trying  pretty  hard.  Do  you  mean  that  I  must  answer 
yes  or  no  ? 

Q.     It  is  capable  of  an  answer,  yes  or  no. 

A.     Will  you  be  good  enough  to  repeat  your  question. 

Q.  I  ask  you  whether,  considering  the  fact  that  there  is  a  very  large  quan- 
tity of  spirituous  liquor,  in  one  form  or  another,  spread  out  over  the  commu- 
nity and  in  the  hands  of  such  a  large  portion  of  the  people  daily,  you  are  not 
in  truth  compelled  to  rely  upon  the  self-restraint  and  morality  of  the  people 
rather  than  upon  any  law  ? 

A.     I  say  no,  not  without  a  law. 

Q.     You  say  no,  hot  without  a  law  ? 

A.  I  say  I  would  not  depend  upon  the  moral  effect  in  a  community  with- 
out a  law  to  support  them. 

Q.  In  point  of  fact,  are  you  not  by  the  very  necessity  of  the  case  com- 
pelled to  depend  upon  that,  because  do  not  people  have  it  within  their  reach  ? 
And  does  not  the  fact  of  their  known  abuse  depend  upon  their  self-restraint, 
and  not  upon  the  existence  of  a  law  which  does  not  apply  ? 

A.  I  should  say  no,  because  the  multitude  of  criminals  who  come  into 
court  get  but  very  little  idea  of  the  law,  except  by  the  punishment.  If  the 
law  is  low,  they  get  very  little  idea  of  their  crime  ;  so  if  the  people  find  out 
that  the  State  have  made  this  a  grave  offence,  it  will  strengthen  the  moral 
sense  of  the  people. 

Q.  Then  you  desire  to  have  this  forcible  legislation  kept  up,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  bearing  a  sort  of  testimony  to  the  people  ? 

A.  Not  chiefly.  We  have  no  right  to  license  an  evil,  or  in  any  way  to 
legislate  an  evil,  whether  we  can  prohibit  it  or  not. 

Q.    Who  has  asked  you  to  license  an  evil  ? 


APPENDIX.  585 

A.  Those  who  ask  for  a  license  law.  Those  who  would  be  sure  to  sell  if 
an  opportunity  was  allowed.  You  and  those  who  are  with  you  want  to  permit 
the  sale  to  a  certain  extent ;  we  feel  that  it  is  ruinous,  and  we  do  not  want  it 
done. 

Q.  Have  we  not  said  that  we  wanted  a  law  to  prevent  men  from  getting 
drunk  ?  Have  we  not  stated  that  it  should  not  be  sold,  except  under  strict 
regulations  ? 

A .  I  understand  those  who  are  back  of  you  ask  for  a  law  that  will  permit 
the  sale  with  certain  restrictions. 

Q.     Have  you  seen  anything  of  that  sort  in  the  petition  ? 

A.    Not,  perhaps,  in  the  exact  language. 

Q.  Does  not  the  petition  in  fact  ask  the  law  to  let  alone  the  whole  subject, 
but  to  allow  the  sale  of  spirituous  and  fermented  liquors  under  the  restrictions 
necessary  for  the  good  order  and  decorum  of  society,  leaving  it  to  individual 
self-restraint  as  regards  its  use,  but  to  punish  him  in  this  use  if  he  is  guilty 
of  a  misdemeanor  ? 

A.    It  may  be  so. 

Q.    Have  you  any  objection  to  that  ? 

A.     Certainly  I  have ;  that  is  the  whole  thing. 

Q.  Then  you  do  object  to  the  citizen's  being  allowed  to  regulate  his  own 
conduct  in  respect  to  its  use  ? 

A.    No,  I  do  not. 

Q.    Being  responsible  to  the  law  for  the  guilt  of  it  ? 

A.  I  do  not  object  to  the  citizen's  regulating  his  own  eating  and  drinking, 
until  it  comes  in  conflict  with  the  rights  and  privileges  of  his  neighbors. 

Q.  And  thus  responsible,  you  do  admit  that  he  may  regulate  his  own 
conduct,  do  you  .not? 

A.  I  object  to  the  licensing  of  men  who  will  open  tempting  bars,  bril- 
liantly lighted,  with  great  attractions,  in  the  city  and  in  the  country,  to  tempt 
my  son,  or  my  friend,  who  are  young  and  inexperienced,  and  to  make  it  such 
a  power  and  influence  upon  them,  that  they  will  probably  be  humiliated  and 
ruined. 

Q.     Suppose  we  strike  out  these  tempting  bars,  then  what  ? 

A.     Well,  it  would  be  better. 

Q.    Nobody  has  yet  proposed  these ;  so  you  can  leave  these  out. 

A.  My  statement  is  based  on  a  license  system,  so  far  as  I  have  been  able 
to  learn  of  it.  They  have  always  been  connected  with  temptation.  If  you 
will  present  something  that  will  accomplish  the  result  desired  as  completely  as 
tlie  prohibitory  law,  I  will  examine  it. 

Q.  Are  you  in  favor  of  the  present  state  of  things,  which  forbids  an 
apothecary  to  sell,  excepting  by  the  prescription  of  a  physician  ? 

A.    Do  you  mean  by  the  direction  of  a  physician  ? 

Q.    You  know  what  the  present  law  is  in  reference  to  apothecaries  i* 

A.    I  have  read  it,  I  believe. 

Q.     Are  you  satisfied  with  it  as  it  stands  ? 

A.     I  have  no  objection  to  it. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  there  is  not,  and  never  has  been,  and  never  can 
be  an  apothecary  pursuing  his  business  in  Massachusetts  as  an  apothecary  is 
74 


586  APPENDIX. 

obliged  to  pursue  it,  without  constant  and  almost  hourly  violation  of  this 
law? 

A.    I  am  not  aware  of  any  such  thing. 

Q.    You  are  not  aware  that  this  is  so  ? 

A.    I  did  not  know  that  apothecaries  could  not  keep  this  law. 

Q.    If  it  should  turn  out  that  they  could  not,  would  you  wish  to  change  it  ? 

A.  The  question  would  be, — what  are  proper  duties  ?  I  think  an  apothe- 
cary ought  never  to  give  very  dangerous  medicines  without  the  direction  of  a 
physician.  I  should  be  very  slow,  indeed,  to  consider  this  a  criminal  sale 
where  it  is  put  up  in  a  prescription  by  an  apothecary  or  his  clerk. 

Q.  Have  you  examined  the  business  of  apothecaries  sufficiently  to  notice 
that  from  ten  to  twenty-five  per  cent,  of  the  business  of  apothecaries  is 
necessarily  unlawful  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  it  is,  necessarily. 

Q.  Then  you  have  not  examined  the  case  ?  You  are  reasoning  a  prior1 
upon  it  ? 

A.    I  have  several  friends  who  are  acquainted  with  it. 

Q.     Did  you  ever  talk  with  apothecaries  concerning  it  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  as  I  have. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  there  is  not  an  apothecary  in  the  city  that  is  not  lia- 
ble to  go  to  the  penitentiary  for  a  longer  period  than  any  of  us  will  live  ? 
Are  you  satisfied  with  that  as  it  stands  ? 

A.    I  am. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  from  ten  to  twenty-five  per  cent,  of  the  bus- 
iness necessarily  done  by  apothecaries  is  done  in  violation  of  this  prohibitory 
law? 

A.     I  do  not  know  any  such  thing ;  I  do  not  believe  it.    • 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  the  people  of  Massachusetts,  who  support  the 
present  prohibitory  law,  patronize,  for  necessary  and  useful  purchases,  the 
State  Agency  alone,  in  procurement  of  their  liquors  and  wines  ? 

A.    I  suppose  they  do. 

Q.    Is  that  your  experience  ? 

A.    It  is. 

Q.     That  they  purchase  what  they  use  of  town  agents  ? 

A.  I  suppose  so.  There  may  have  been  a  time  when  this  question  was 
supposed  to  be  given  up — two  or  three  years  ago,  perhaps,  during  the  war, 
when  there  was  carelessness  about  it.  But  there  is  no  doubt  in  my  own 
mind  that  now,  when  there  is  a  disposition  to  carry  out  the  law  and  enforce 
it,  the  temperance  men  will  abide  by  the  law  strictly. 

Q.     Have  they  done  so  ? 

A .    I  have  not  examined. 

Q.     So  far  as  you  know  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  of  an  instance. 

Q.     Have  you  heard  of  any  ? 

A.    I  have  not  heard  of  any. 

Q.    And  yet  you  edit  a  weekly  paper,  do  you  ? 

A.    I  do. 


APPENDIX.  587 

.-  TESTIMONY  OF  MAYOR  GEORGE  O.  FAIRBANKS. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  are  Mayor  of  Fall  River  ? 

A.     I  am. 

Q.    You  know  the  question  at  issue  here  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Which  are  you  in  favor  of,  a  license  law  or  a  prohibitory  law  ? 

A .    I  am  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law  as  it  now  stands. 

Q.     How  does  it  work  in  your  region  now  ? 

A.  It  is  all  that  can  be  desired  ;  and  does  a  great  deal  for  the  cause  of 
temperance,  as  I  believe. 

Q.    Have  you  been  acquainted  with  the  operation  of  the  license  law  ? 

A.  Nothing  further  than  that  we  drove  the  rurusellers  out  of  our  town, 
and  they  ran  into  another  State. 

Q.     Does  that  do  anything  to  restrain  the  amount  of  drinking  ? 

A.    It  does  not  so  far  as  I  know. 

Q.  Have  you  any  particular  statement  to  make,  to  show  how  the  law 
operates  in  your  city  ? 

A.  I  have  only  been  engaged  in  my  present  duties  for  a  short  time,  and 
have  not  had  time  to  gather  up  many  statistics.  I  have  made  inquiries  of 
those  who  have  been  in  office  before  me,  as  to  the  state  of  things  before  as 
compared  with  the  operation  of  the  State  Constabulary  system,  we  having 
but  a  single  member. 

Q.     That  single  member  has  done  something  ? 

A.  The  testimony  is  that  he  has.  In  my  own  position  I  have  seen  some- 
thing of  the  effect  of  its  workings  ;  and  those  who  have  seen  it  testify  that 
there  is  something  done.  They  testify  that  there  are  fewer  places  than  for- 
merly, and  that  a  certain  portion  are  removed.  I  can  recollect  many  which 
were  among  the  most  troublesome  places  that  we  had. 

Q.     Is  there  anything  you  would  like  to  say  further  in  relation  to  it  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  as  there  is  anything  particular.  As  I  have  said,  the 
temperance  cause  is  active  at  present,  and  has  been  during  the  last  year. 

Q.     There  is  a  large  moral  movement  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  There  are  large  organizations  that  hold  their  meetings 
N weekly.  There  is  one  that  holds  its  meetings  Sunday  evenings ;  and  there  has 
ibeen  an  attendance  consisting  of  men  mostly,  at  which  there  is  an  admission 
fee  at  the  door,  and  at  which  there  were  thirteen  hundred  present  at  a  recent 
meeting ;  thus  showing  the  degree  of  activity  in  the  cause. 

Q.    You  do  not  see  that  this  is  diminished  by  the  operation  of  the  law  ? 
A.    No,  sir;  I  do  not. 

Q.     Does  not  the  operation  of  the  law  stimulate  them  ? 
A.    It  has  been  my  opinion  that  it  does. 

TESTIMONY  or  EEV.  En  THURSTON,  D.  D. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  know  the  questions  which  are  usually  put 
here,  I  suppose.  Which  do  you  prefer,  a  license  law  or  a  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  have  long  been  a  prohibitionist,  and  I  have  no  confidence 
myself  in  the  operations  of  a  license  law,  and  I  have  reason  I  think  to  believe 
in  the  total  and  entire  success  of  this  law  of  prohibition,  if  it  is  rigidly 


588  APPENDIX. 

enforced,  and  I  wish  to  add  my  testimony  to  what  the  mayor  just  said. 
people  of  Fall  River  are  somewhat  peculiarly  situated  ;  almost  the  entire 
respectability,  wealth,  influence  and  property  of  that  city  are  in  favor,  as  they 
always  have  been,  of  the  prohibitory  law.  The  whole  power  of  the  city  is  on 
that  side.  You  could  not  get  any  vote  that  would  amount  to  anything,  so  far 
as  character,  wealth,  influence  and  business  is  concerned,  on  the  other  side. 
In  regard  to  the  execution  of  the  law,  I  may  say  that  a  single  man  came  in 
to  the  city  (I  cannot  say  how- long  since,  perhaps  six  months  ago),  and 
although  the  people  generally  did  not  seem  disposed  to  co-operate  with  him, 
and  although  the  city  government  were  opposed  to  him,  and  also  the  police,  he 
shut  up  almost  all  of  those  great  rum-shops  in  that  city,  in  the  course  of  a  few 
months ;  and  he  did  it  almost  alone,  which  is  proof  to  me  that  there  is  power 
in  that  law.  I  have  seen  it  executed  by  the  people  themselves  two  or  three 
times  when  I  have  been  there.  A  little  excitement  in  the  temperance  cause 
and  the  people  would  take  hold  of  the  law.  They  shut  these  places  all  up 
without  any  difficulty  at  all.  It  has  been  done  repeatedly,  proving  that;  they 
can  do  it  any  day.  The  question  may  be  asked,  why  they  do  not  undertake 
it,  and  why  they  do  not  keep  these  places  closed.  And  my  answer  is,  that  the 
men  who  are  opposed  to  the  law  and  in  favor  of  the  license  law,  are  of  such  a 
character  that  it  is  unsafe  for  a  temperance  man  to  move  strongly  in  that  mat- 
ter. Men  have  lost  their  barns,  and  they  have  had  fire  set  to  their  houses,  and 
they  have  been  afraid  to  execute  that  law,  as  they  would  otherwise  unques- 
tionably have  done.  In  regard  to  a  license  law,  I  based  it  first  on  principle. 
It  is  based  on  a  false  principle.  It  licenses  a  certain  class  of  men  to  sell  an 
article  which  is  a  fruitful  cause  of  crime,  degradation  and  ruin.  If  you  would 
have  a  license  in  which  men  should  be  restricted  in  the  use  of  this  article,  and 
the  least  drunkards,  men  who  arc  burdens  to  society,  and  who  should  be  under 
heavy  bonds  not  to  sell  to  young  men,  or  intemperate  men,  there  would  be 
some  plausibility  to  the  theory.  The  other  course  proposed  by  all  license 
laws,  is  simply  filling  up  the  ranks  of  drunkards  as  fast  as  they  die  off,  and 
making  the  place  where  liquor  is  drank  and  sold  respectable,  and  taking 
young  men  and  initiating  them  into  this  vice,  and  to  keep  the  ranks  of  the 
intemperate  full.  If  you  could  reverse  the  thing  entirely  there  would  be 
some  show  of  plausibility  to  the  temperance  law ;  and  I  am  persuaded  that 
people  of  my  own  city,  and  of  my  own  region,  the  temperance  men,  those 
who  have  acted  in  this  cause,  and  have  labored  in  it  and  have  sufiered  for  it, 
are,  as  a  community,  opposed  to  the  license  law.  Our  ministers  of  almost 
all  denominations  are  opposed  to  the  license  law  ;  and  very  seldom  do  I  hear 
a  minister  express  the  least  distrust  of  the  righteousness  and  the  necessity  of 
the  prohibitory  law. 

<2.     How  is  it  with  the  Catholic  clergy  in  your  city  ? 

A.  I  am  not  able  to  state  as  to  that.  There  is  but  one  there,  and  I  believe 
he  has  not  been  here  to  testify. 

Q.  Do  the  other  clergymen,  the  Orthodox,  the  Baptist,  the  Methodist,  the 
Universalist  ministers  in  Fall  River,  favor  the  license  law  ?  In  your  judg- 
ment, is  there  one  of  these  who  does  ? 


APPENDIX.  589 

A.  I  am  not  certain  about  that.  There  is  one  clergyman  who,  I  under- 
stood, refused  to  sign  the  petition  against  the  license  law.  I  do  not  know  the 
fact. 

Q.  It  is  said  that  people  can  go  over  into  Ehode  Island  and  get  liquor 
there,  if  they  desire  to  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  and  the  clerk  of  the  boat  told  me  last  night  that  when  Major 
Blood  was  there,  he  carried  load  after  load  of  decanters,  pumps  and  all  that 
kind  of  thing,  which  they  use  in  their  bar-rooms,  to  towns  where  there  is  a 
license  law,  and  these  men  set  up  there  without  any  license.  In  the  town  of 
Warren,  where  there  were  twenty  or  thirty  sellers,  there  was  only  one 
licensed,  as  I  understand.  After  Major  Blood  left  Fall  River  (so  the  clerk 
told  me),  they  brought  them  back  to  the  boat  one  day  before  they  received  a 
telegram  that  the  Major  had  got  back,  and  there  was  a  great  scrambling  to 
get  their  fixtures  all  back  again. 

Q.     Did  they  carry  them  back  to  Rhode  Island  ? 

A.     They  left  them  at  the  wharf. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  they  are  trying  to  get  rid  of  their  license  law 
in  Rhode  Island  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  have  heard  that  they  are  trying1  to  strengthen  it  and  give 
it  some  back-bone. 

Q.     Is  there  anything  further  you  would  like  to  say  ? 

A.  I  want  to  say  one  word  in  reference  to  the  question  which  was  put  in 
reference  to  the  Scripture  argument  of  this  matter  of  old  wine  and  new  wine, 
and  whether  or  not  the  Scripture  recognizes  these  articles  as  wine.  We  read 
in  the  Bible,  "  Your  presses  shall  burst  out  with  new  wine  ; "  that,  certainly,  is 
not  fermented  wine.  It  establishes  the  fact  in  my  own  mind  that  that  article 
which  is  called  in  the  Scriptures,  wine,  is  unfermented  juice  of  the  grape. 
One  man  was  asked  if  the  Bible  said  that  if  a  man  drunk  a  glass  of  wine,  he 
should  not  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God.  The  Bible  does  say  this :  "  Touch 
not,  taste  not,  handle  not ;"  and  it  says,  "  Look  not  upon  the  wine  when  it  is 
red,  when  it  giveth  its  glory  in  the  cup."  And  that  is  more  stringent  than  any 
prohibitory  law  that  I  ever  heard  of,  or  the  creed  of  any  temperance  man 
that  I  ever  heard  of. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  How  do  you  suppose  it  possible  that  the  wine- 
press could  burst  out  with  anything  else  but  new  wine  ? 

A.  I  do  not  suppose  it  could.  The  question  is  whether  the  Scripture 
recognizes  the  application  of  the  term  wine  to  that  which  is  unfermented. 

Q.  The  question  was  how  could  it  be  anything  but  new  wine  when  it  is 
bursting  out  of  the  press  ? 

A.     Of  course  it  could  not. 

Q.  But  is  it  not  clear  from  your  text,  or  from  your  quotation,  that  when 
the  text  means  new  wine,  it  says  so  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  it  is  necessary  to  suppose  that  it  always  implies  it.  It 
simply  shows  this  point,  and  that  is  all  I  adduced  it  to  show  :  that  the  term 
wine  is  applied  to  the  juice  of  the  grape,  before  it  is  fermented. 

Q,  Do  you  not  recollect  that  it  says  in  the  New  Testament,  No  mai 
putteth  new  wine  into  old  bottles,  lest  the  bottles  burst  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 


590  APPENDIX. 

Q.  And  there  is  another  illustration  where  the  Scripture,  when  it  means 
new  wine,  says  so.  Now  how  is  new  wine  going  to  burst  a  bottle  (which 
among  the  ancients  was  usually  a  leather  bag),  unless  on  account  of  the 
process  of  fermentation  which  changes  it  into  wine  proper,  or  old  wine  ? 

A.  I  do  not  care  to  be  drawn  from  the  simple  point  for  which  I  quoted 
that  passage. 

Q.  When  our  Saviour  made  wine  at  the  marriage  feast,  was  not  the  wine 
that  he  made  praised  by  the  people  who  drank  it,  because  it  was  the  best  wine 
which  they  had  at  the  feast  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Can  you  conceive  it  possible  that  if  they  had  been  drinking  old  or 
fermented  wine  before,  they  should  have  called  that  better  wine  ? 

A.     There  may  have  been  temperance  people  there. 

Q.  If  they  had  been  pursuing  your  theory,  they  would  not  have  drank  the 
other  at  all,  would  they  ? 

A.    Perhaps  they  did  not ;  there  is  no  proof  that  they  drank  any  other. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  from  the  beginning  until  now,  the  Jewish  peo- 
ple, celebrating  the  Feast  of  the  Passover,  have  always  celebrated  it  with  fer- 
mented wine  ? 

A .     I  do  not  know  that. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  Rev.  Mr.  Smith,  one  of  the  Protestant  missionaries 
in  Palestine  some  years  ago,  writing  an  article  which  was  published  in  the 
"  Bibliotheca  Sacra,"  said  that  at  the  present  day  it  is  in  use,  and  that  no  other 
wine  would  be  admissible  in  the  Hebrew  Feast  of  the  Passover,  and  that  such 
is  the  tradition  ? 

A.  That  was  a  good  many  years  ago.  This  is  a  recent  thing  that  he  states 
this  fact  in  regard  to. 

Q.  This  is  a  recent  thing  which  he  states  now,  but  does  he  not  state  that 
the  fact  is  such  as  far  as  the  Hebrew  tradition  extends ;  is  not  that  a  fact  ? 

A.    I  believe  it  to  be  a  fact. 

Q.  Do  you  not  understand  that  so  far  as  the  traditions  of  the  Christian 
churches  go  back  into  the  remote  ages,  whether  you  assume  the  Apostolic 
succession  with  the  Catholic  and  Episcopal  Churches,  or  whether  you 
assume  the  belief  of  other  denominations  upon  this  point,  the  unbroken 
practice  and  custom  of  the  church  has  been  in  observing  the  sacrament  of 
the  Lord's  Supper,  which  was  a  continuation  of  the  Feast  of  the  Passover, 
to  use  fermented  wine  ? 

A.  I  have  not  any  disposition  to  doubt  that  point  at  all.  There  are  ques- 
tions in  reference  to  that  subject,  as  they  are  presented  to  us  in  the  Bible, 
that  I  acknowledge  that  I  cannot  explain  to  my  own  satisfaction  ;  but  I  would 
say  here  that  the  people  with  whom  I  am  acquainted,  are  unwilling  to  stake  a 
great  principle  that  involves  the  welfare  of  the  people,  upon  any  of  these 
things.  They  look  upon  that  subject  just  as  they  looked  upon  certain  objec- 
tions made  formerly  upon  the  subject  of  slavery,  precisely  of  the  same  char- 
acter and  disposed  of  in  the  same  way. 

Q.  Is  not,  perhaps,  the  great  peculiarity  of  the  Hebrew  system  of  religion, 
and  of  the  Mosaic  system,  its  system  of  prohibition  ?  Is  not  one  great  pecu- 
liarity of  the  Mosaic  system  its  prohibitory  character,  and  the  constant  recur- 


APPENDIX.  591 

rence  of  the  "  tliou  slialt  not,"  covering  both  meat  and  drink  in  the  practice 
of  life? 

A.     There  were  a  great  many  prohibitions  of  that  kind. 

Q.     A  vast  number,  were  there  not  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  not  Mohammed,  some  six  hundred  years  after  Christ,  institute  a 
prohibition  against  the  use  of  wine,  which  was  not  found  among  the  Christian 
nations  ? 

A.    I  am  not  aware  of  that  fact. 

Q.     Are  you  not  aware  that  Mohammed  prohibited  wine  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  there  was  any  prohibition  of  that  kind  among  the 
Christian  nations  before  that,  or  that  it  was  understood  by  Christian  nations, 
or  any  portion  of  them  down  to  that  time,  as  forming  any  part  of  their 
system  ? 

A.     There  was  a  class  of  men  prohibited  expressly  from  using  wine  ? 

Q.    What  class  ? 

A.     The  sons  of  Levi. 

Q.     Did  these  sons  of  Levi  form  any  portion  of  the  Christian  Church  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  I  ask,  whether  you  do  not  recollect  that  Mohammed  introduced  the 
prohibition  of  wine  six  hundred  years  after  Christ,  when  during  the  inter- 
vening six  hundred  years  down  to  that  time,  among  the  Christian  churches  no 
such  prohibition  existed  ? 

A.     I  am  not  certain  about  that  fact ;  it  may  be  so. 

Q.  Do  you  not  recollect  that  after  the  ascension  of  Christ,  the  whole  sys- 
tem of  prohibition,  touching  clean  and  unclean  things,  was  put  to  an  end,  and 
determined,  and  understood  by  the  Apostles  to  be  determined  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  that  he  in  his  turn  instructed  them  that  they  must  put  all  that 
system  of  prohibition  behind  them  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  I  admit  all  that. 

Q.     And  that  the  Apostles  did  themselves  partake  of  wine  ? 

A .  It  always  does  the  temperance  cause  good  when  you  get  down  to  these 
quibbles. 

Q.  Let  us  understand  each  other,  and  I  will  leave  the  people  to  understand 
for  themselves. 

A.     I  do  not  deny  anything  you  state,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  desire  that  the  State  shall  put  a  law  upon  us  in  this  matter, 
which  the  Christian  system  did  not  require  ? 

A.     Which  the  Christian  system  did  not  in  its  earlier  days. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect,  too,  that  there  was  a  substitution  by  the  Apostles  in 
the  place  of  these  ancient  prohibitions  of  a  new  rule  by  which  the  Christian 
should  be  enabled  to  judge  himself,  and  all  Christian  people  were  to  be 
entitled  to  judge  of  themselves,  and  their  own  conduct  ? 

A.     If  they  did  not  infringe  upon  the  rights  of  others. 

Q.  But  did  not  the  Apostle  say  concerning  the  use  of  meats  and  wines, 
"  Let  no  man  judge  you  ?  " 


592  APPENDIX. 

Mr.  SPOOXER.     That  was  in  reference  to  the  ceremonial  service. 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  and  the  Governor  knows  it  was. 

Q.  Is  there  any  other  rule  for  the  Christian  world,  touching  this  whole 
subject,  than  this  rule  laid  down  by  the  Apostle  to  "  stand  fast  in  the  liberty 
with  which  you  have  been  made  free  ;"  and  again,  "  in  whatsoever  you  eat  or 
whatsoever  you  drink,  do  it  all  for  the  glory  of  God  ?  " 

A.     That  is  very  good  doctrine. 

Q.  That  is  the  Christian  liberty,  is  it  not  ?  Was  it  ever  intefered  with  in 
Christian  nations  until  the  Mohammedan  religion  ? 

A.  We  are  perfectly  willing  men  should  have  that  liberty  until  they  come 
to  encroach  upon  the  liberties  of  society. 

Q.  There  is  no  dispute  as  to  that.  Do  you  know  the  effect  of  the  Moham- 
medan system  of  prohibition  upon  its  own  followers  ? 

A.    I  have  not  taken  pains  to  consider  that  matter. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  the  Mohammedan  religion  was  the  most  effi- 
cient system  possible,  because  the  law  of  the  Koran  was  not  only  binding  as  a 
matter  of  religion,  but  was  also  binding  upon  the  citizen  ? 

A .  I  do  not  believe  any  such  law  is  upon  our  statute  books  at  the  present 
day.  The  present  law  binds  nobody's  conscience. 

Q.  Exactly.  On  the  other  hand  it  is  weaker  than  the  Mohammedan  sys- 
tem of  prohibition,  for  that  was  binding  upon  the  conscience  as  well  as  the 
duties  of  the  citizen.  If  you  have  not  pursued  the  investigation,  I  will  not 
press  the  question,  but  if  you  have,  I  would  like  to  know  what  is  the  fact  ? 

A.  If  I  were  to  admit  that,  I  should  not  admit  that  the  simple  act  of  pro- 
hibition had  been  the  great  instrumentality  that  had  wrought  the  evil,  by  any 
means. 

Q.  1  ask  you,  if  in  view  of  the  fact  that,  whereas  Mohammed  published  his 
religion  very  nearly,  in  point  of  place,  where  the  religion  of  Christ  was  first 
promulgated,  he  did  fulminate  his  decree  against  the  use  of  wine,  whereas 
Christ  never  did,  is  there  not  some  inference  to  be  drawn  from  that  fact,  I 
would  ask  you  ? 

A.  Are  all  laws  to  be  stricken  off  from  the  statute  book  because  they  pro- 
hibit crimes  ?  Why  should  you  single  out  this  law  any  more  than  the  law 
that  prohibits  stealing,  or  the  law  that  prohibits  murder  ? 

Q.  Simply  because  you  have  undertaken,  by  artificial  legislation,  to  make 
an  artificial  offence.  Now  I  ask  you  whether  or  not  there  is  any  inference  to 
be  drawn  from  the  fact  that  Mohammed  fulminated  his  decree  against  the  use 
of  wine,  and  Christ  did  not  ? 

A.  The  Governor  may  draw  such  an  inference,  and  he  may  be  perfectly 
honest  in  it ;  but  it  will  be  very  difficult,  in  my  own  opinion,  for  him  to  make 
the  community  make  any  such  inference.  I  cannot  conceive  how  you  single 
out  this  prohibitory  law,  in  relation  to  intoxicating  driuks,  and  leave  un- 
touched all  other  prohibitory  laws.  That  is  the  point  that  I  do  not  understand. 
I  put  this  on  the  same  ground  that  I  do  other  prohibitory  laws  ;  and,  in  my 
mind,  it  is  as  necessary  to  prohibit  the  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks,  as  it  is 
to  prohibit  robbery  and  arson.  We  oftentimes  prohibit  a  man  from  injuring 
his  neighbor,  when  we  have  no  right  to  prevent  his  injuring  himself.  That  is ; 
that  we  have  no  legal  right.  A  man  may  use  anything  injurious  to  himself 


APPENDIX.  593 

and  family,  and  we  cannot  prohibit  him  from  doing  that.  He  must  do  it  and 
take  the  consequences,  and  his  family  must  take  the  consequences. 

Q.  Now,  then,  since  the  Christian  system  was  a  republication  of  the 
moral  law  of  Moses,  and  since  the  moral  law  declares  "  thou  shalt  not 
kill,"  and  since,  under  the  Christian  system,  there  was  no  prohibition  against 
wine,  with  what  propriety  do  you  put  me  that  question  and  make  me  that 
reply,  or  undertake  to  draw  any  analogy  between  the  drinking  and  selling  of 
wine  and  the  unlawful  and  murderous  taking  of  life  ? 

A.     I  think  it  is  a  taking  of  life.    I  think  it  is  murder. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  The  Levitical  priesthood  were  prohibited  the 
use  of  wine,  were  they  not  ? 

A    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  We  have  had  many  clergymen  here  and  doctors  of  divinity,  who  have 
testified  in  favor  of  a  license  law.  Do  you  not  think  it  would  be  beneficial  if 
they  were  subject  to  such  a  law,  they  and  their  people  ? 

A.  I  do,  sir.  I  have  a  high  respect  for  these  men,  but  it  does  seem  to  me 
that  some  of  them  have  not  got  into  the  nineteenth  century. 

Adjourned, 

75 


594  APPENDIX. 


SEVENTEENTH  DAY. 

WEDNESDAY,  March  20, 1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  the  hearing  of  testimony  in 
behalf  of  the  Remonstrants  was  continued. 

TESTIMONY  OF  EX-MAYOR  ZEBINAH  L.  RAYMOND. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  reside  in  Cambridge,  do  you  not  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    And  have  been  connected  with  the  city  government  there  ? 

A.     I  was  mayor  in  1855  and  1864. 

Q.  How  is  the  state  of  things  in  Cambridge  now,  with  regard  to  the  use 
and  sale  of  liquor,  compared  with  what  it  was  when  you  were  first  mayor? 

A.  I  think  there  is  a  decided  improvement  in  Cambridge  in  regard  to 
drunkenness  in  the  place.  There  are  not  so  many  drunkards  there  now  as 
there  was  in  1855. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  number  of  places  of  sale  was  greater  then  in  propor- 
tion to  the  number  of  places  of  sale  now  ? 

Q.  I  have  no  doubt  of  it.  I  do  not  know  but  one  place  of  sale  where  it  is 
common  to  go  in  and  purchase  liquor,  and  where  it  is  an  open  place.  There 
are  others,  I  believe. 

Q.  You  can, look  back  to  the  time  when  we  used  to  have  licenses  in  various 
places  in  the  State  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  think  I  understand  the  system  of  licenses  pretty  well. 
When  I  first  commenced  business  in  Boston,  I  was  in  the  West  India  grocery 
trade.  It  was  common  for  most  merchants  to  sell  liquors  as  they  did  other 
goods.  At  the  commencement  of  1840, 1  turned  out  all  the  liquor  that  I  had 
in  the  store,  because  I  deemed  it  to  be  wrong  to  sell.  Previous  to  that  time 
we  used  to  sell 'largely  to  country  traders.  In  several  stores  I  recollect,  in 
Worcester  and  in  Franklin  Counties,  they  sold  a  hogshead  a  week. 

Q.    What  town  was  that  ? 

A.    In  the  town  of  Petersham,  in  Worcester  County. 

Q.     What  is  the  population  of  that  town  ? 

A.  At  that  time  it  was  four  thousand,  or  in  that  neighborhood.  That  was 
thirty  years  ago.  That  was  in  the  summer  season.  I  speak  of  that  to  show 
that  the  diminution  in  the  sale  of  liquor  is  very  large,  whereas  it  may  not  be 
so  in  Boston. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  in  the  country  towns  like  that,  there  is  a  fifteenth 
part  now  used,  per  head,  that  there  was  then  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  there  was  a  twentieth  part  used  then  that  there  is  now 
in  the  very  large  majority  of  the  towns  of  the  Commonwealth. 

Q.  Is  there  a  fifteenth  part  now  used,  compared  with  what  there  was  used 
before  the  reform  commenced  ? 


APPENDIX.  595 

A.  I  do  not  think  there  is  in  the  country,  sir.  I  am  not  qualified  to  judge 
exactly  about  it;  but  that  is  my  opinion,  so  far  as  my  observation  extends. 

A.  You  are  quite  sure  that  the  number  of  places  is  reduced  in  Cam- 
bridge ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  believe  that  the  present  prohibitory  law  is  productive  of  a 
great  deal  more  of  good  than  any  license  law  that  can  possibly  be  made,  for 
the  reason  that  the  license  system  cannot  be  based  on  any  principle  of  equal 
justice.  The  principle  of  the  present  law  is  a  just  one ;  all  are  restricted  from 
the  sale.  The  moment  you  establish  a  license  system,  you  have  the  rich 
pitted  against  the  poor.  I  think  it  is  impossible  to  make  a  license  law  that 
shall  be  so  satisfactory  and  just  in  all  respects  as  the  present  law.  I  think 
that  we  ought  to  try  and  enforce  this  law,  now  that  we  have  more  leisure  than 
we  have  had  for  some  years. 

Q.    Is  it  not  enforced  in  the  country  now  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  think  it  is,  to  a  very  great  extent.  I  think  there  is  no  dif- 
ficulty in  the  enforcement  of  the  law  in  all  places  except  in  Boston  ;  and  I 
think  if  influential  men  would  give  their  influence  to  the  enforcement  of  the 
law,  it  would  be  enforced. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  the  plan  proposed  here,  which  is  to  let  every 
municipality  license  or  not,  as  they  please,  would  be  very  unjust  and  unequal 
in  its  operation  ?  For  instance,  here  is  a  certain  town  votes  not  to  sell  and 
not  to  license,  and  an  adjoining  town  (perhaps  villages  within  a  mile  or  two 
of  each  other),  licenses  the  sale,  and  attracts  young  men,' and  those  who  have 
the  habit  strong,  over  into  this  town.  Do  you  not  think  that  this,  in  effect, 
nullifies  the  operation  of  the  law,  and  that  this  would  be  the  necessary  opera- 
tion of  it  ? 

.4.  I  think  it  is.  I  think  that  if  Cambridge  refused  to  license,  and  Brigh- 
ton and  Somerville  should  license,  the  law  would  be  of  very  little  value  to  us  ; 
and  a  very  large  share  of  the  liquor  drank  now  in  Cambridge,  is  brought  from 
Boston  by  expressmen.  And  I  think  that  it  would  be  one  of  the  worst  laws 
that  could  be  enacted.  It  would  be  of  no  kind  of  benefit  to  the  town  that 
tried  to  prohibit  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  spoke  of  the  state  of  things  about  the  time  of 
the  reformation.  How  long  did  the  great  change  that  you  refer  to  occur 
before  1852? 

A.  I  think  it  did,  to  some  extent,  before  to  1852,  through  moral  suasion; 
and  I  think  that  the  great  thing  that  has  drove  out  intemperance  since  then 
has  been  the  law. 

Q.    Did  not  all  the  change  occur  prior  to  1852  ? 

A.     No,  sir,  I  think  not. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that,  previous  to  1852,  there  were  public  sales  in 
these  towns  ? 

A.     I  think  so. 

Q.     You  do  not  know  the  fact,  do  you  ? 

A.  I  know  it  as  much  as  anything  that  I  have  not  seen  with  my  own  eyes. 
I  do  not  know  that  it  is  sold  in  a  particular  town.  I  would  not  swear  that  it 
was  sold  in  that  town. 

Q.    Do  you  know  anything  about  the  State  Agency  in  that  town  ? 


596  APPENDIX. 

A.    No,  sir ;  nothing  at  all. 

Q.  I  want  to  ask  you  whether  you  are  wedded  to  any  particular  form  of 
law,  or  if  you  simply  desire  a  law  that  would,  in  connection  with  other  instru- 
mentalities, diminish  drunkenness  and  promote  temperance  ?  Is  that  the 
kind  of  law  you  would  prefer  ? 

A.    It  is,  sir. 

Q.  If  any  modification  of  the  present  law  would  make  it  more  beneficial, 
you  would  not  object  to  it  ? 

A.  I  would  be  in  favor  of  the  law  that  would  be  of  the  most  good  to  all 
the  people  in  the  Commonwealth. 

Q.  If  it  could  be  accomplished  without  any  legislation,  should  you  think  it 
would  be  worth  the  while  to  have  legislation  upon  it  ? 

A.  I  should  not.  I  do  not  belie\e  that,  in  my  own  experience  in  Massa- 
chusetts, it  can  be  done  without  the  law  and  among  all  men.  I  think  that 
when  a  man  becomes  satisfied  of  an  evil,  he  will  do  better  to  restrain  himself 
from  it  without  the  action  of  law,  if  he  can. 

Q.  What  you  want  is  something  to  check  intemperance  and  drunkenness, 
is  it  not  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Then  it  becomes  a  question  of  fact,  which  kind  of  law  will  best  pro- 
mote that  result  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  that  is  the  object. 

Q.    Is  that  a  question  upon  which  honest  minds  may  well  differ  ? 

A.  I  think  honest  minds  may  differ,  but  I  think  some  persons  are  better 
qualified  to  judge  than  others. 

Q.  There  are  men  that  are  not  as  well  qualified  to  judge  as  others.  You 
do  not  claim  that  you  are  a  better  judge  than  anybody,  do  you  ? 

A.  I  do  not.  I  think  anybody  should  form  his  opinion  upon  the  informa- 
tion which  he  has. 

Q.    Do  you  mean  to  say  that  people  do  not  get  liquor  in  Cambridge  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  do  not  attempt  to  say  so. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  your  grocers,  though  they  do  not  keep  it  in 
sight,  yet  have  liquors  which  they  supply  to  families  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  of  a  grocer  that  sells  it.. 

Q.     Do  you  know  of  any  that  do  not  ? 

A .    I  know  of  many  that  I  think  do  not. 

Q.     Are  there  any  cases  of  intemperance  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    How  do  they  compare  with  several  years  ago  ? 

A.    I  believe  there  has  been  a  great  improvement  during  the  last  ten  years. 

Q.    Was  there  more  twenty  years  ago  than  now  ? 

A.    I  have  not  any  doubt  of  it  in  my  own  mind. 

Q.    What  are  your  means  of  observation  ? 

A.     Simply  meeting  with  other  persons,  and  conversation,  etc. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  compare  the  reports  of  arrests  in  the  courts,  with  the 
view  of  comparing  the  amount  of  intemperance  at  different  times  ? 

A.  The  only  comparison  that  I  have  made  is  between  1863  and  1866,  in 
looking  over  financial  reports  that  I  had. 


APPENDIX.  597 

Q.    How  was  it  in  1865  ? 

A.  I  did  not  compare  the  amount  in  1865.  There  was  a  gain  of  thirty- 
one  in  the  arrests  for  drunkenness,  as  between  the  years  1863  and  1866. 
There  were  less  in  1866,  notwithstanding  the  increase  in  population. 

Q.    How  was  it  in  1860  ?    Do  you  know  the  number  of  arrests  ? 

A.    I  do  not,  sir. 

Q.  You  said  that  you  regarded  one  obstacle  in  the  way  of  the  operation 
of  the  present  law,  as  resting  upon  the  fact  that  a  great  many  influential  men 
in  the  community  were  not  favorable  to  it.  If  they  came  in  with  one  voice 
in  support  of  the  present  system  you  think  it  would  be  carried  out  do  you  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Suppose  they  will  not,  what  are  you  going  to  do  ? 

A.  I  look  upon  it  in  this  way :  I  think  it  has  been  a  moral  question  very 
much  like  the  question  of  slavery ;  not  exactly  so,  but  to  some  extent  I 
believe  that  if  we  had  not  at  the  North  taken  a  decided  position  we  never 
could  have  accomplished  the  results  that  have  been  accomplished.  I  believe 
that  if  we  make  up  our  minds  as  decidedly  in  regard  to  the  question  of  tem- 
perance, as  we  did  in  the  war,  we  can  do  a  great  deal.  I  think  it  would  be 
exceedingly  injudicious  to  repeal  the  law  at  the  present  time,  until  we  have 
an  opportunity  after  our  war  to  see  if  we  can  test  it. 

Q.  You  say  that  a  class  of  people  do  not  favor  the  prohibitory  laws.  If 
they  do  not,  what  are  you  going  to  do  about  it  ? 

A.  I  should  do  the  best  thing  that  I  could,  as  I  said  before.  I  think  that 
the  present  law  is  the  best  law. 

Q.    What  remedy  do  you  propose  ? 

A.  We  must  do  with  this  as  with  all  obstinate*  cases.  I  believe,  sir,  that 
we  effect  a  good  many  moral  reforms  where  we  have  but  a  bare  majority  to 
start  with,  that  majority  being  determined ;  whereas,  if  we  had  to  get  a  very 
large  majority  before  we  started,  it  would  come  much  later. 

Q.  Do  you  think  you  can  get  a  large  majority  in  favor  of  this  law,  when 
there  is  this  large  class  of  people  who  are  accustomed  to  drink  wines  ? 

A.     We  shall  get  along  until  they  are  satisfied  with  the  change. 

Q.     Do  you  believe  that  the  law  will  make  them  change  their  view  ? 

A.     I  believe  it  does  sometimes  make  people  change  their  minds. 

Q.     Their  co-operation  seems  needful  to  make  your  law  work  well  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  the  law  has  any  tendency  to  make  these  people  change 
their  views  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir \  I  believe  it  has;  because  public  sentiment  has  changed  a 
good  deal. 

Q.    Do  you  think,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  that  the  law  ever  reforms  a  criminal? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  think  so.  I  think  it  has  a.  tendency  to  make  them  better 
men. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  a  thorough  reformation  of  a  criminal  was  ever 
effected  by  any  law  in  the  world ;  and  by  reformation,  I  mean  an  entire 
change  of  the  aims  and  purposes  of  life  and  action  ? 

A.    I  presume  there  have  been  cases.   I  could  not  point  to  a  case  just  now. 

Q.     Did  you  ever  know  of  one  ? 


598  APPENDIX. 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  I  have  known  of  one. 

Q.     The  law  did  it? 

A.    I  know  the  person  was  a  better  man  when  the  law  had  hold  of  him. 

Q.  When  you  appeal  to  fear,  is  that  a  motive  which  changes  the  purposes 
of  a  person's  heart  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  appeal  to  the  higher  passions. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  infliction  of  a  penalty  (I  do  not  mean  to 
say  that  they  should  not  have  these"  laws  against  drunkenness),  does  of  itself 
ever  reform  the  drunkard  ? 

A.  I  believe,  sir,  that  there  have  been  cases;  and  I  could  mention  one 
case  where  a  man  who  had  led  a  dissolute  life  was  confined  for  a  time,  and 
after  having  time  to  deliberate,  and  by  the  advice  of  others,  had  been 
reformed. 

Q.     Not  by  the  law  alone,  but  by  these  moral  influences  ? 

A.     The  law  was  the  foundation  of  it,  sir. 

Q.  Is  it  true  that  the  convicts  in  State  Prison,  as  a  general  rule,  come  out 
moral  men  ?  Is  there  not  something  in  the  very  effect  of  the  execution  of  the 
criminal  law,  that  tends  to  prevent  those  moral  changes  necessary  to  precede 
real  reformation  V 

A.  I  do  not  know,  sir,  that  there  is  anything  in  it  that  would  prevent  it. 
I  think  that  they  are  intended,  when  the  Legislature  makes  them,  to  produce 
good,  and  by  being  enforced,  to  effect  a  reform  which  nothing  else  could 
effect. 

Q.     You  do  not  suppose  that  the  law  tends  much  to  make  a  man  religious  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  but  I  think  that  the  law,  by  restraining  a  man  who  is  an 
exceedingly  immoral  man,  and  giving  him  an  opportunity  to  reflect,  may 
sometimes  reform  him. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  this  law,  since  1852  has,  in  the  city  of  Boston, 
diminished  drunkenness  or  promoted  temperance  ? 

A .  I  am  not  so  well  qualified  to  judge  in  regard  to  Boston ;  but  if  yon 
would  compare  Boston  at  the  present  time  with  the  condition  of  things  at  that 
time,  my  impression  is  that  you  would  find  that  there  had  been  a  decided 
improvement. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  inquire  whether,  in  the  making  of  laws,  there  ought 
not  to  be,  in  your  judgment,  some  reference  to  the  public  sentiment  and  the 
state  of  things  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir.    I  think  there  ought  to  be. 

Q.  Now,  are  there  not  portions  of  the  Commonwealth  who  have  opinions 
very  different  in  regard  to  this  matter ;  and  that  the  same  law  which  would 
operate  well  in  Berkshire,  might  not  operate  well  in  Boston  ? 

A .  I  think  that  the  duty  of  the  Legislature  is  to  make  such  laws,  as  should 
be  productive  of  the  greatest  good  to  the  greatest  number  of  people  in  the 
Commonwealth. 

Q.  Still  we  find  that  in  the  rural  counties  of  the  State,  intemperance  is 
very  much  checked  and  the  evil  is  not  very  great ;  but  yet,  that  in  Boston  and 
the  larger  cities  of  the  Commonwealth,  it  is  different.  Now,  I  ask  you,  do 
you  think  that  the  same  means  that  would  operate  well  in  Berkshire,  would, 
of  course,  cause  them  to  operate  well  in  the  larger  cities  ? 


APPENDIX.  599 

A.  I  think  the  same  force  could  not  annihilate  it  in  Boston  as  elsewhere ; 
but  if  you  annihilate  it  in  Suffolk  County  and  then  bend  your  forces  to 
annihilating  it  in  other  places,  you  would  accomplish  the  desired  object  more 
speedily. 

Q.  But  here  is  a  large  quantity  of  the  article  which  goes  cut  among  the 
manufacturers  and  among  the  people,  some  fifty  millions  of  gallons.  How 
are  you  going  to  prevent  the  people  from  getting  this  which  has  been  sold  ? 

A.  There  is  no  general  rule  but  what  there  is  some  exception  to  it,  and  it 
may  be  difficult,  perhaps,  in  all  cases  to  exclude  the  article. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  very  great  difficulty,  taking  the  fact  that  this  large  quan- 
tity is  sold  in  every  large  shop  and  every  manufactory — a  very  large  amount, 
and  more  than  half  of  the  amount  which  is  produced  annually  ;  and  taking 
the  fact  that  this  is  in  the  hands  of  the  community — in  preventing  that  liquor 
from  getting  into  use  among  the  people  and  producing  the  natural  results  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt,  sir,  that  it  is  possible  that  it  may  be  done.  The 
mechanic  may  buy  liquor  for  mechanical  purposes  and  place  it  in  his  shop, 
and  some  individual  may  get  it  and  take  some  of  it,  and  drink  it.  And  in  that 
very  case  it  would  be  very  difficult  to  get  a  law  to  prevent  him  from  using  it ; 
but  when  you  compare  that  with  the  power  of  the  open  shop,  where  your  son 
and  my  son  may  go  and  get  a  drink  every  time  he  goes  by  it,  I  think  that 
you  will  find  there  is  a  very  great  difference. 

Q.  What  would  be  your  opinion  if  such  a  law  as  that  which  is  proposed 
here  could  be  carried  into  effect  ? 

A.  If  I  understand  you,  you  desire  that  such  houses  as  the  Parker  House 
and  Tremont  House  shall  be  permitted  to  sell  liquor  to  their  guests.  My 
opinion  would  be,  that  it  would  be  very  difficult  to  decide  who  those  guests 
were.  I  live  in  Cambridge.  I  have  a  son  nineteen  years  of  age.  His  business 
is  in  Boston,  for  instance,  and  is  invited  to  Parker's  to  dine  or  to  sup  with  a 
party  of  friends.  There  would  be  a  question  as  to  whether  he  was  a  guest  of 
the  house  as  much  as  a  traveller  who  is  stopping  there  would  be.  If  my  son 
is  a  guest  of  the  house,  and  the  law  allows  these  houses  to  sell  liquor  to  their 
guests  in  that  way,  I  think  that  a  license  system,  in  that  respect,  would  be 
worse  than  the  law  as  it  exists  at  present.  I  look  upon  that  as  the  very  worst 
species  of  the  thing.  The  influence  of  yourself  and  of  Governor  Andrew  is 
very  great,  and  that  influence  ought  to  be  for  the  good  of  the  community  ; 
and  if  we  attempt  to  make  a  law  of  this  kind,  I  think  we  should  consider  the 
danger  of  making  the  sale,  of  liquor  respectable  in  any  place. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  The  students  of  Cambridge  College  would  be 
guests,  would  they  not  ? 

A.     They  would  be  guests ;  I  do  not  know  how  you  could  discriminate. 

Q.  Some  discussion  has  arisen  in  regard  to  the  opinions  of  influential  men, 
as  being  opposed  to  the  enforcement  of  the  law.  Is  it  not  a  fact,  that  all 
reforms  have  arisen  among  a  different  class  of  people,  and  have  been  carried 
right  over  such  men  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  as  they  are  carried  over  such  men;  but  reforms  have 
generally  been  carried  over  the  heads  of  some  men  very  high  in  the  commu- 
nity :  and  I  believe  that  at  first  the  class  of  men  who  were  in  favor  of  the 
prohibition  of  slavery  was  very  small ;  but  I  believe  that  they  are  now  very 


600  APPENDIX. 

well  satisfied  with  the  result  which  has  been  accomplished.  I  believe  that 
reforms  are  carried  on  the  principle  of  eternal  justice,  no  matter  who  is 
against  them. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  liquor-dealers  of  Boston  are  men  to  be  classed 
particularly  among  the  thinking  men  of  the  community  ? 

A.  I  think  that  reasonable  men  endeavor  to  be  reasonable  in  their 
opinions,  though  I  suppose  they  may  make  mistakes. 

TESTIMONY  OF  WILLIAM  E.  JACKSON. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)    Your  residence  and  business  ? 

A.    I  reside  in  Boston  ;  my  business  is  at  350  Hanover  Street. 

Q.  Please  to  state  your  observation  with  reference  to  the  workings  of  a 
license  law  and  a  prohibitory  law. 

A.  I  suppose  that  the  prime  object  which  calls  me  here  is  my  being  con- 
nected with  the  Howard  Benevolent  Society  and  the  Boston  Provident  Asso- 
ciation. I  have  been  connected  with  these  societies  for  the  last  few  years ; 
some  seven  years  with  one,  and  four  with  the  other.  In  these  societies  we  are 
brought  from  house  to  house,  and  very  directly  into  acquaintance  with  the 
effect  of  liquor ;  and  we  see  the  effect  of  liquor  and  of  drinking,  in  connec- 
tion with  poverty.  There  have  been  a  great  many  instances,  of  course,  which 
have  come  under  my  observation  ;  but  it  would  be  monotonous  here  to  state 
them. 

Q.     Please  to  state  them  generally. 

A.  I  have  a  memorandum  here  of  instances  of  marked  interest  as  regards 
the  effect  of  liquor,  and  also  as  regards  the  way  in  which  liquor  is  obtained, 
as  it  is  in  a  variety  of  ways,  in  this  state  of  utter  destitution. 

Q.     Please  to  state  a  few  of  them,  if  you  please  ? 

A.  Here  is  one  case  of  a  woman  who  is  a  communicant  of  the  Episcopal 
Church.  Her  husband  is  a  sea-faring  man  ;  he  is  industrious  and  sober, 
generally  ;  but  at  times  not.  I  would  remark  here  that  when  we  visit  persons 
who  make  applications  to  us  for  aid,  we  do  not  take  pains  to  let  them  know 
that  \ve  are  going  to  visit  them ;  but  endeavor  to  ascertain  what  is  their  real 
condition,  and  we  walk  in  where  they  are  without  giving  them  much  opportu- 
nity to  be  prepared.  In  this  case  which  I  refer  to,  I  opened  the  door  suddenly, 
and  found  the  woman  lying  upon  the  bed,  in  an  almost  nude  state,  and  she 
had  a  little  infant  that  was  travelling  around  over  her  and  trying  to  wake 
her  from  the  stupor  she  was  in  from  the  effect  of  the  liquor  she  had  been 
drinking.  These  persons  will  sell  anything  they  have  in  the  house  in  order 
to  get  money  to  obtain  liquor ;  and  there  have  been  instances  in  which  the 
bible  has  been  sold  in  order  to  get  money  to  get  liquor  with.  Another  case 
was  that  of  a  man  who  had  paralysis  in  both  legs,  and  was  mostly  dependent 
upon  charity.  I  called  on  him  very  recently.  Just  prior  to  my  visit,  the 
clergyman  was  there,  praying  with  this  man.  After  the  clergyman  retired,  I 
got  close  to  him.  He  would  not  admit  to  the  clergyman  that  he  had  been 
drinking.  I  found  that  he  had  been  drinking,  and  that  he  had  been  drinking 
excessively,  and  I  notified  everybody  not  to  let  him  have  any  more  liquor. 
There  was  an  application  recently  by  a  woman  who  desired  aid  ;  and  I  went 
into  her  house,  and  came  upon  her  suddenly ;  and  on  opening  the  door,  I 


APPENDIX.  601 

found  her  sitting  on  the  window-stool,  and  in  such  a  state  that  she  actually 
fell  over  and  fell  down  as  I  went  in. 

Q.     Are  such  cases  frequent  ? 

A.     They  are  very  frequent  indeed. 

Q.    You  see  them  every  day  ? 

A.  We  see  them  every  week,  at  least ;  we  do  not  visit  every  day.  I  am 
of  opinion  that  there  is  less  liquor  drank  under  the  present  law  than  formerly 
These  is  one  way  in  which  they  buy  it,  which  is  by  the  gill.  They  obtain  it, 
and  they  obtain  it  very  freely.  They  pawn  even  their  dresses,  or  anything 
with  which  they  can  get  any  money :  and  these  articles  are  left  at  the  discre- 
tion of  the  pawn-broker.  Of  course  it  is  generally  in  destitute  circumstances. 
Very  generally,  on  these  articles  which  are  pawned,  the  time  runs  out,  and 
of  course  they  are  not  redeemed.  I  do  not  think  it  is  true  that  liquor  is  sold 
in  the  tenement  houses  to  any  great  extent.  I  have  visited  tenement  houses 
very  frequently,  and  I  never  have  yet  come  across  a  place  where  liquor  was 
sold  in  them.  One  reason  is  that  where  it  is  sold  there  is  invariably  fighting. 
The  owners  of  the  buildings  do  not  have  a  great  deal  to  do  with  it ;  but  it  is 
for  the  interest  of  the  men  who  have  the  under-letting  of  these  rooms  not  to 
have  any  fighting.  I  find  that  liquor  is  drank  more  among  foreigners.  In 
fact  I  should  say,  from  general  observation,  that  two-thirds  of  the  quantity 
of  liquor  drank  is  among  foreigners.  This  is,  of  course,  an  invidious  com- 
parison. The  English,  Portuguese,  and  Germans  rank  first  as  regards  temper- 
ance. The  Irish  are  famous  for  fighting.  The  Portuguese  are  more  tem- 
perate than  any  other  class  of  foreigners.  I  think  that  one-half  of  the  pov- 
erty which  we  find  is  directly  or  indirectly  owing  to  drink.  At  the  time  that 
I  commenced  my  business  at  the  junction  of  Salem  and  Charter  Streets,  this 
business  had  been  carried  on  in  connection  with  the  grocery  business,  and  I 
was  obliged,  in  buying  out  the  store,  to  buy  the  liquor;  and  I  disposed  of  it  in 
various  ways,  the  rum  to  the  physicians,  the  brandy  to  the  soldiers,  etc.  And 
I  think  I  stand  in  very  good  relations  to  those  who  used  to  buy  liquors  there. 
I  then  moved  to  Hanover  Place.  This  place  was  a  notorious  rum-drinking 
place.  I  have  done  business  there  some  two  years,  and  the  business  has  very 
much  increased,  and  on  account  of  not  selling  liquor,  I  think.  I  am  in  favor 
of  the  prohibitory  law  ;  and  I  think  that  if  people  could  see  it  in  the  places 
where  we  see  it,  they  would  be  convinced  of  the  need  of  it.  I  think  that  the 
idea  of  leaving  it  to  the  towns,  to  say  whether  they  would  license  the  sale  of 
liquor  or  not,  would  be  bad,  even  if  the  principle  were  applied  to  States. 

Q.    You  pursue  the  grocery  business  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Without  liquors  ? 

A .    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  not  find  that  you  succeed  as  well,  and  sell  as  much  as  you 
would  with  liquors  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  about  the  business  of  others,  but  we  succeed  very  well. 
When  we  took  the  business  they  had  been  doing  a  business  of  ten  thousand 
dollars,  and  we  did  a  business  of  twenty-two  thousand  dollars  the  first  year. 
I  do  not  believe  in  liquor  in  any  form  except  prescribed  by  a  physician. 
76 


602  APPENDIX. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Are  you  frequently  in  these  tenement  houses,  in 
your  ministrations  among  the  poor  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  daily. 

Q.    Is  there  intemperance  in  these  houses  ? 

A.  More  or  less  all  the  time ;  that  is,  in  general.  I  do  not  know  so  much 
about  them  of  late  as  formerly. 

Q.    There  is  intemperance  in  them  ? 

A.     There  is. 

Q.    Whether  the  liquors  are  sold  in  the, houses,  or  not,  you  do  not  know  ? 

A .    I  do  not  know  ;  I  never  have  been  able  to  ascertain. 

Q.  The  statement  is  made  here  that  the  liquor  is  carried  into  the  houses 
and  divided  up  among  the  different  tenants.  Have  you  seen  anything  in 
your  observation  to  lead  you  to  think  that  that  statement  is  incorrect  ? 

A.  I  have  not  been  able  to  find  liquor  in  quantity,  except  in  the  case  I 
mentioned. 

Q.  You  stated  that  at  the  present  time  the  bars  are  closed,  and  said  some- 
thing about  their  carrying  it  out  in  quarts  and  gallons.  What  do  you  mean 
to  say  ? 

Q.  I  mean  if  they  restrict  the  sale  by  the  glass,  they  can  buy  it  by  the 
gill  or  by  the  small  quantity. 

Q.  Are  these  the  places  that  the  State  Constable  has  shut  up  so 
rapidly  ? 

A.    I  could  not  say  as  to  that. 

Q.  You  say  that  the  bars  are  closed,  but  that  they  sell  over  the  bar  in 
bottles  ? 

A.  The  majority  of  those  with  whom  I  have  come  in  contact  have  quit 
entirely.  There  are  a  few  who  sell  in  this  way. 

Q.    That  is  in  these  places  where  the  bar  is  closed  ? 

A .     That  is  what  I  have  been  telling  you. 

Q.     Have  you  any  doubt  that  a  secret,  furtive  sale  is  carried  on  largely  ? 

A.     I  am  of  opinion  that  it  is  not. 

Q.     Have  you  any  means  of  forming  a  definite  opinion  whether  it  is  or  not  ? 

A.  The  general  conversation  of  parties  interested,  at  the  north  part  of  the 
city,  is  that  it  is  getting  to  be  dangerous  business  to  do  it.  The  majority  of 
them  are  waiting  for  the  issue  at  the  present  time.  I  know  personally  of  one 
man  who  has  been  indicted,  I  believe,  several  times,  and  has  paid  several 
fines  ;  and  I  am  of  the  opinion  that  he  does  not  sell  in  any  way.  And  yet  it 
is  but  a  short  time  since  I  heard  him  say  that  he  was  going  to  take  his 
chances. 

Q.    How  long  since  ? 

A.  It  is  about  two  or  three  months.  He  said  he  could  keep  a  small  stock 
ready  to  be  seized  by  the  constable,  and  keep  his  entire  stock  somewhere 
near  by. 

Q.    Is  not  that  a  pretty  extensive  business  ? 

A.    I  do  not  think  it  it  is  now. 

Q.    You  give  your  opinion  from  their  conversation  ? 

A.     General  conversation. 

Q.     Do  you  suppose  that  they  tell  you  truly  ? 


APPENDIX.  603 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  cannot  pretend  to  say  that  I  am  a  judge  of  character  very 
extensively. 

Q.    Have  they  not  a  strong  interest  to  deceive  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  but  I  do  not  base  my  opinion  only  upon  conversation  with 
liquor-dealers.  I  base  my  remarks  upon  observation. 

Q.  From  what  you  see  of  the  public  appearance,  you  do  not  think  there  is 
much  sold  in  this  way  ?  Have  you  any  other  means  of  information  ? 

A.    No,  sir  ;  but  I  think  it  may  be  easily  found  out. 

Q.     Is  intoxication  in  Boston  increasing  or  decreasing,  in  your  opinion  ? 

A.  In  the  city  at  large,  as  the  question  is  put,  I  am  not  able  to  form  a 
correct  opinion;  but,  confining  it  to  the  North  End,  I  should  say  that  intox- 
ication was  decreasing. 

Q.     How  do  you  arrive  at  that  opinion  ?     From  general  observation  V 

A.  And  from  personal  contact  with  parties  who  formerly  drank 
excessively. 

Q.     Have  you,  in  getting  at  that  opinion,  consulted  the  police  records  ? 

A.  I  have,  sir,  somewhat ;  but  they  are  not  sectionalized,  and  so  they 
would  not  be  of  any  information  for  me  in  regard  to  any  particular  district. 

Q.    You  have  no  direct  information  in  regard  to  the  whole  city  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  The  question  is,  whether  the  number  of  cases  of  drunkenness  are 
increasing  ;  not  as  to  the  appearances.  If  the  actual  number  of  cases  of  drunk- 
enness, and  the  daily  number  of  arrests,  according  to  the  police  reports,  is 
shown  to  have  been  on  the  increase,  your  general  observation  would  not  be  so 
good  as  the  statistical  observation  of  the  police  officers,  would  it  ? 

A.     Of  course  not. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  Is  it  a  fact  that  the  number  of  cases  could  be 
very  much  increased  by  the  understanding  of  the  different  stages  of  drunk- 
enness ? 

A.     Yes,  sir  ;  that  is  a  point  that  I  wished  to  state. 

Q.  Considering  that  these  statistics  may  be  varied  by  the  different  stages 
of  intoxication  in  which  persons  are  arrested,  would  you  regard  a  comparison 
of  numbers  as  having  any  great  value  ? 

A .  No,  sir ;  I  think  a  person  would  not  be  able  to  form  a  very  definite 
opinion  from  them.  I  would  say  this,  in  reference  to  the  influence  of  law  at 
the  North  End :  I  think  that  this  law  is  so  practical  that  it  drives  men  to 
reform.  I  think  it  operates  as  in  old  times  the  law  drove  us  to  Christ.  I 
never  have  been  able  to  obtain  the  reformation  of  a  man  without  primarily,  or 
in  some  way,  the  effect  of  the  law  upon  him. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Have  you  noticed  the  reports  of  the  cases 
of  drunkenness  in  the  "  Boston  Journal "  for  the  past  few  weeks  ? 

A.    I  think  the  cases  are  only  about  half  as  large  as  they  were. 

TESTIMONY  OF  MAYOR  Eurus  S.  FROST. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     How  long  have  you  held  the  position  of  Mayor  of 

Chelsea  ? 

A.     Since  the  first  of  January. 
Q.     This  is  your  first  year  ? 


604  APPENDIX. 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  is  the  feeling  of  your  city  government  in  regard  to  the  existing 
law? 

A.  The  members  of  the  city  government  have  sent  in  a  petition  against  a 
license  law,  signed  by  seven  of  the  Aldermen  and  thirteen  of  the  Common 
Council. 

Q.     Your  government,  then,  is  decidedly  in  favor  of  the  present  law  ? 

A.    It  is. 

Q.    Is  that  law  being  executed  in  Chelsea  ? 

A .    It  has  been  for  the  last  two  or  three  months. 

Q.     Will  you  state  with  what  success  ? 

A.  A  year  since,  the  City  Marshal  informed  me  there  were  seventy-six 
places  where  liquor  was  sold  over  there.  Now  there  is  not  one  where  it  is 
sold  openly. 

Q.  You  do  not  consider  it  an  open  question  whether  the  prohibitory  law 
can  diminish  the  sale  of  liquors  ? 

A.    It  has  diminished  it.     I  cannot  say  whether  it  has  suppressed  it  or  not. 

Q.     Has  this  law  been  executed  exclusively  by  the  Constabulary  force  ? 

A.  Not  exclusively ;  the  Constable  of  our  city  calls  in  the  aid  of  the  City 
Police. 

Q.    Do  they  acquiesce  ? 

A .     They  do,  entirely. 

Q.     Does  the  city  government  sympathize  with  them  ? 

A.     They  do. 

Q.  Do  you  observe  any  disturbances  in  your  city  in  connection  with  the 
sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.  There  are  very  few  disturbances.  At  my  request,  the  City  Marshal 
took  a  list  of  the  number  of  cases  taken  before  the  court  from  January  first, 
1866.  The  number  of  cases  of  drunken  disturbances  last  year  was  fifty-one ; 
the  number  the  present  year  was  thirty-six. 

Q.  Your  feeling  is  that  the  present  law  in  regard  to  intemperance  should 
be  heartily  sustained  ? 

A.     That  is  our  belief,  sir. 

Q.  How  would  you  feel  with  regard  to  the  proposed  plan  of  giving  discre- 
tion to  the  cities  and  towns  ?  For  example,  should  you  in  Chelsea  decide 
against  a  license  law,  how  would  you  be  affected,  in  your  judgment,  by  a 
license  law  in  Boston  ? 

A.  We  should  be  very  sorry  to  have  it  done.  Many  of  the  cases  of 
drunkenness  which  come  to  us  now  are  of  those  who  come  home  from  the  city 
late  at  night,  and  have  to  be  taken  care  of. 

Q.    Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 

A.    In  Franklin  Street,  in  this  city. 

Q.     In  the  jobbing  business  ? 

A.    In  the  commission  business. 

Q.  What  is  the  difference  of  opinion,  so  far  as  you  know,  among  the 
merchants  in  that  neighborhood,  on  the  subject  of  license  or  prohibition  ? 

A.    My  impression  would  be  that  they  would  be  about  equally  divided. 


APPENDIX.  605 

Q.  How  are  the  clergy  of  your  city  disposed  in  this  matter  ?  Do  you 
know  of  any  Protestant  clergymen  who  are  opposed  to  prohibition  ? 

A.  I  cannot  think  of  one.  I  think  they  are  all  in  favor  of  the  present 
law ;  but  I  cannot  say  it  from  actual  knowledge.  I  know  that  the  majority 
of  them  are. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     There  is  no  open  sale  in  Chelsea,  is  there  ? 

A.    No  open  sale. 

Q.    Is  liquor  procured,  in  your  opinion  ? 

A.    I  suppose  there  may  be  some  places  where  it  is  secretly  sold. 

Q.     Have  you  any  doubt  of  it  ? 

A.  One  place  came  to  our  notice  on  Saturday  last;  but  on  being  notified 
by  the  State  Constabulary,  the  man  promised  not  to  sell  again. 

Q.    Have  you  a  State  Liquor  Agency  in  Chelsea  ? 

A.    We  have,  sir. 

Q.  Do  the  people  generally,  for  medicinal  and  culinary  purposes,  get 
their  liquor  there  ? 

A.    I  am  not  acquainted  with  that  part  of  the  business. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that,  to  any  considerable  extent,  they  go  there  to  get  it  ? 

A.  I  am  not  able  to  say,  because  I  have  not  been  at  the  liquor  agent's 
since  the  commencement  of  my  term  of  office. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  fact  that  people  do  purchase  liquor  for  these 
purposes  ? 

A.    I  do  not. 

Q.    Whether  they  go  there  or  get  it  elsewhere,  you  do  not  know  ? 

A.    I  do  not. 

Q.  There  are  places  in  Chelsea,  are  there  not,  where  people  can  go  and 
get  liquor  for  any  culinary  purpose,  if  they  want  it  ? 

A.    I  am  not  sufficiently  acquainted  with  the  traffic  to  know,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  any  grocery  in  the  city  where  they  could  not  get 
it  if  they  wanted  it  ? 

A.    I  am  not  aware  of  any  grocer  in  the  city  who  sells. 

Q.    You  do  not  know  whether  they  sell  or  not,  do  you  ? 

A.     There  may  be  some  persons  who  sell. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  open  sale  at  the  places  where  they  keep  liquor 
in  the  city  ?  Would  you  not  call  it  an  open  sale  where  a  man  goes  into  a 
grocery  and  buys  a  bottle  of  wine  or  any  kind  of  ardent  spirits  ? 

A .  That  I  should  call  an  open  sale  ;  but  I  do  not  know  that  there  is  any- 
thing of  that  kind  in  the  city. 

Q.  So  far  as  your  observation  in  Boston  is  concerned,  do  you  consider  that 
there  is  less  intemperance  than  there  was  fifteen  years  ago  ? 

A.  Among  the  class  of  men  that  I  deal  with,  I  think  there  is  less  than 
there  was  fifteen  years  ago. 

Q.     How  is  it  as  to  the  people  generally  ? 

A.    I  do  not  think  I  could  give  any  intelligent  opinion  on  that  subject  ? 

Q.  Do  you  know  in  regard  to  the  use  of  liquor  on  social  occasions,  whether 
it  is  more  commonly  used  than  then  ? 

A.  I  have  an  impression  that  a  certain  class  use  it  more  than  formerly, 
and  that  other  classes  use  it  less. 


606  APPENDIX. 

Q.     Do  these  families  who  use  it  go  the  agency  or  elsewhere  ? 

A.     I  am  not  informed. 

Q.  Your  opinion  I  would  like  as  to  whether  the  kind  of  legislation  that 
recommends  itself  to  your  judgment  would  be  that  which  would  most  effectu- 
ally suppress  intemperance.  You  are  not  wedded  to  any  particular  theory  or 
any  particular  law  ? 

A.     Only  so  far  as  I  can  see  that  it  operates  well. 

Q'  The  law  that  operates  best  and  checks  intemperance  most,  you  would 
think  the  best  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir,  decidedly. 

Q.  And  the  question  whether  the  present  law  or  some  modification  of  it  if 
the  best,  is  a  matter  of  opinion  between  different  individuals,  according  a* 
they  consider  that  fact,  is  it  not  ? 

A.     Certainly,  sir. 

Q.  May  it  not  be  that  the  same  law,  executed  in  the  same  way,  which 
would  operate  well  in  the  country,  would  not  operate  well  in  the  large  cities 
like  Boston  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  principle  should  be  adhered  to.  If  the  principle  is 
right  in  the  country,  it  is  in  Boston.  If  the  principle  is  right  in  Chelsea,  it  is 
in  Boston. 

Q.  Suppose  the  principle  to  be  right,  yet  is  there  not  a  state  of  things  in 
which  the  same  right  principle  would  not  operate  as  well  in  one  place  as  in 
another,  and  that  not  owing  to  the  principle,  but  to  the  difference  in  circum- 
stances ? 

A.-    It  might  not  operate  as  well,  but  the  principle  would  be  the  same. 

Q.  Would  you  hold  to  the  principle  in  such  a  case  always,  or  try  some- 
thing else  as  a  matter  of  expediency  ? 

A.  I  hardly  think  it  would  be  right  to  do  evil,  that  good  might  come  from 
it. 

Q.    Do  you  consider  it  wrong  to  sell  a  glass  of  liquor  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  Were  you  ever  a  young  man  in  business  in  this 
city,  and  was  your  commercial  education  in  this  city  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  twenty-nine  years  since. 

Q.  Among  the  clerks  or  book-keepers,  employe's  in  respectable  commercial 
houses  in  this  city,  how  is  it  in  that  class  of  young  men  now  ?  Do  they  drink 
less  or  more,  or  is  the  influence  of  the  employers  such  as  to  check  habits  of 
drinking  more  than  formerly  ?  How  is  that  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  should  be  able  to  make  a  correct  comparison.  I 
can  remember  a  good  many  who  started  with  me  who  are  now  in  drunkards' 
graves,  and  some  who  will  be  likely  to  follow  them  if  they  continue  their 
present  habits. 

Q.  Is  not  this  true  in  this  city :  that  of  two  young  men  of  equal  capacity 
for  business — one  in  the  habit  of  drinking  and  the  other  a  total  abstainer — is 
there  a  merchant  in  this  city  who  would  not  employ  the  one  who  was  a  total 
abstainer  in  preference  to  the  other  ? 

A.    I  think  there  is  no  question  about  it  at  all. 


APPENDIX.  607 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Do  you  think  it  is  a  sin  to  sell  a  glass  of  cider  to  be 
drank  ? 

A.  Under  certain  circumstances,  I  think  it  would  be.  For  instance,  a 
friend  of  mine  has  been  in  the  habit  of  drinking,  and  he  has  been  doing  all 
he  can  to  become  a  sober  man.  I  think  it  would  be  wrong  for  any  person, 
knowing  his  situation,  to  sell  him  a  glass  of  intoxicating  liquor  of  any  kind. 

Q.  Take  yourself,  or  Mr.  Miner,  or  me.  Do  you  think  it  would  be  a  sin 
to  sell  a  glass  of  liquor  to  either  of  us  ? 

A.     I  think  where  men  have  had  as  much  experience  as  you  it  would  be  safe. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that,  in  all  cases  whatever,  the  selling  of  a  glass  of  liquor 
to  be  drank,  is  a  sin  V 

A.     There  are  certain  circumstances,  of  course,  where  it  may  not  be. 

Q.  Well,  I  mean  as  a  beverage,  not  where  a  man  is  freezing  or  dying.  But, 
in  all  cases,  do  you  think  it  would  be  a  sin  to  sell  a  glass  of  liquor  to  be  drank  ? 

A.     I  think  it  would  be  wrong  to  sell  a  glass  of  brandy. 

Q.     Do  you  think  it  would  be  equally  a  sin,  in  all  cases,  to  sell  a  glass  of  cider  ? 

A.     Not  equally  a  sin. 

Q.     Well,  is  it  a  sin  to  drink  it  ? 

A-     I  think  not,  sir. 

Q.     Then,  under  the  same  circumstances,  is  it  a  sin  to  sell  it  ? 

A.     I  think  not,  sir. 

Q.     If  it  is  not  a  sin  for  me  to  drink  it,  is  it  a  sin  for  me  to  sell  it  ? 

A.     I  think  not,  on  that  particular  point. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  are  in  the  domestic  goods  business  ? 

A.'   Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Your  goods  go  all  over  the  country  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  They  say  that  about  one-half  of  the  liquor  which  is  manufactured  in 
the  country  is  used  in  the  arts,  so  that  there  would  be  considerable  influence 
upon  the  business  habits  of  the  people,  would  there  not  ? 

A.     That  would  be  my  impression. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  Do  you  think  it  would  be  wrong  for  citizens  to 
sell  their  cider,  or  any  other  kind  of  intoxicating  liquor,  in  violation  of  the  law  ? 

A.    I  do. 

TESTIMONY  OP  HON.  JOHN  S.  LADD. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     Where  do  you  reside? 

A.     In  Cambridge. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  resided  there  ? 

A.     Since  1839. 

Q.     What  office  do  you  hold  ? 

A.  For  the  last  thirteen  years,  judge  of  the  Police  Court,  for  the  district 
of  Cambridge. 

Q.  What  is  the  state  of  the  temperance  cause  in  Cambridge  now,  com- 
pared with  what  it  was  thirteen  years  ago  ? 

A.  Unquestionably  very  much  improved.  The  value  of  my  opinion,  per- 
haps, would  be  better  determined  by  reference  to  certain  statistics  drawn 
from  the  records  of  my  court,  which  are,  I  think,  quite  decisive  upon  that 


608  APPENDIX. 

question.  Perhaps  an  inference  drawn  from  them  -would  depend  somewhat 
upon  the  fact  whether  the  comparisons  made  would  include  similar  conditions 
of  the  respective  periods.  I  would  state  that  the  administration  of  the  busi- 
ness of  the  court  has  been,  I  think,  very  uniform,  both  as  to  the  activity  of 
the  police  in  making  prosecutions,  the  conditions  of  arrest,  and  the  general 
uniformity  of  the  practice.  I  am  not  aware  that  during  the  last  dozen  years 
there  has  been  any  essential  change.  The  views  of  the  court,  of  course,  have 
controlled  somewhat  the  action  of.  the  police  as  to  the  propriety  of  entering 
complaints.  I  would  state  that  in  cases  of  drunkenness,  against  parties 
charged  as  common  drunkards,  almost  invariably,  if  not  always,  the  complaints 
are  entered  by  the  police,  not,  as  in  a  case  of  assault  and  battery  and  larceny, 
by  citizens  generally,  but  always  by  the  police.  Taking  the  year  1855-6,  the 
average  number  of  complaints  for  drunkenness  per  year  was  389  ;  for  1865-6, 
the  average  number  of  cases  was  334,  being  sixteen  per  cent,  less,  the  popula- 
tion increasing  forty-five  per  cent.,  from  20,473  to  29,404.  It  is  well  known 
to  those  who  are  familiar  with  the  administration  of  criminal  justice,  that  there 
is  a  certain  class  of  offences  that  run  very  nearly  parallel  with  those  of 
intemperance.  Cases  of  simple  assault  and  battery  usually  accompany 
intemperance.  The  number  of  cases  for  assault  and  battery,  for  the  year 
1855-6,  was  147 ;  for  1865-6,  151.  As  perhaps  slightly  varying  from  this 
statement,  I  should  say  that  as  to  crimes,  generally,  there  has  been  an  increase 
in  some  measure  proportionate  to  the  increase  of  population.  The  whole 
number  of  prosecutions  before  the  court  would  probably  average,  for  the  year 
1855-6,  about  650.  This  refers  to  criminal  prosecutions.  For  the  last  two 
years,  I  think  these  would  average  about  900.  Taking  the  average  for  the 
last  six  months,  the  difference  is  still  greater.  The  number  of  prosecutions 
for  intemperance  during  the  last  six  months  is  79,  which  would  be  an  average 
of  158  for  the  year.  The  present  population  of  Cambridge  is  about  32,000. 
It  has  increased  fully  fifty  per  cent,  within  the  last  twelve  months.  My 
impression  and  general  observation  confirm  the  inference  to  be  drawn  from 
these  statements.  Unquestionably  there  is  much  less  intemperance  externally 
than  there  was  ten  or  twelve  years  ago. 

Q.  How  about  the  number  of  places  of  sale  as  compared  with  the  number 
ten  years  ago  ? 

A.  There  has  been  unusual  activity  by  the  police  and  especially  by  the 
State  Constabulary  within  the  last  six  months.  I  should  think  the  first  seizure 
was  about  the  first  of  July  last.  The  first  warrant  issued  from  the  police 
court  was  about  the  first  of  August.  Since  that  time  there  have  been  about 
thirty  warrants  issued  against  parties  violating  the  law,  for  the  purpose  of 
seizure.  Within  the  past  six  months  I  think  there  has  been  a  very  great 
change. 

Q.    And  a  reduction  in  the  number  of  places  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir.     I  think  there  has  been. 

Q.     Can  you  give  the  figures  as  to  the  number  of  places  of  sale  now  open  ? 

A.  I  am  not  informed  in  regard  to  the  number  of  places.  I  know  that 
quite  a  large  number  have  been  closed.  Parties  have  come  forward  who  were 
prosecuted,  in  several  instances,  plead  guilty  and  submitted  to  the  fine  ;  and 
from  information  mainly  derived  from  prosecuting  officers,  I  have  reason  to 


APPENDIX.  609 

believe  that  many  places  have  been  closed.    Those  that  are  still  open  are 
engaged  in  secret  sales. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  it  would  be  perfectly  practicable  in  the  State 
police  to  clear  out  the  places  of  sale  in  Cambridge  entirely  ? 

A.     There  could  be  no  question  about  that. 

Q.  How  would  it  work  if  there  if  there  was  a  law  which  allows  Boston  to 
sell,  and  the  sale  in  Cambridge  was  prohibited  ? 

A.  If  the  purpose  of  the  law  was  to  suppress  intemperance  it  certainly 
would  defeat  the  object  in  Cambridge,  for  the  facilities  of  obtaining  liquor  are 
so  great  that  it  would  be  freely  taken  from  Boston  there. 

Q.  Do  you  not  understand  that  it  is  a  great  source  of  trouble  with  Cam- 
bridge College,  that  the  young  men  are  exposed  to  the  temptations  of  the 
drinking-houses  of  Boston  ? 

A.    That  has  never  been  prominently  brought  before  me. 

Q.  But  do  you  not  understand  that  they  have  been  subject  to  temptation 
in  that  way,  much  to  the  regret  of  the  government  and  the  people  there  ? 

A.  I  cannot  speak  from  any  facts  or  information  in  my  knowledge,  but  I 
suppose  that  if  bar-rooms  are  open  in  Boston  they  are  subject  to  that 
temptation.  I  can  say  this,  that  with  some  knowledge  of  the  relations  of 
students  to  the  community,  those  of  Cambridge  College  are  as  orderly, 
regular  and  temperate  as  the  students  of  any  college  in  the  country.  Very 
rarely  is  it  known  of  students  becoming  intoxicated,  and  especially  among 
the  under  graduates.  The  cases  that  have  occurred  have  not  been  among  the 
under  graduates.  . 

Q.  t  Do  you  not  think  that  the  sentiment  of  the  people  would  be  decidedly 
opposed  to  a  license  law  in  Cambridge  ? 

A.  If  that  is  the  opinion  of  a  majority  of  the  people  of  Cambridge,  I  have 
no  opportunity,  mode  or  means  of  determining  it  more  than  any  other 
citizen,  except  from  my  incidental  connection.  I  think  it  is  very  generally 
desired  from  all  parties,  by  all  classes  that  the  open  bars  of  the  rum-sellers 
shall  be  closed.  I  think  there  is  a  very  large  majority  who  would  unite  in 
the  means  that  would  accomplish  that  object. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  I  suppose  that  there  are  a  portion  of  the  citizens  of 
Cambridge,  whether  a  majority  or  not  I  do  not  know,  but  a  respectable  num- 
ber of  citizens  of  high  standing,  that  object  to  the  prohibitory  law  in  its  present 
form  ? 

A.    I  think  there  are. 

Q.  Do  you  think  with  that  class  of  people,  if  an  arrangement  or  modifica- 
tion of  the  law  were  made  which  would  close  the  public  bars  and  otherwise 
restrict  the  traffic,  it  would  be  entirely  satisfactory  and  secure  their  co-operation 
in  the  execution  of  such  a  law  ? 

A.  I  have  no  reason  to  doubt  it.  I  think  whatever  may  be  considered 
the  best  policy  or  means  of  restricting  the  traffic,  that  they  will  heartily  unite 
in  the  effort.  The  temperance  associations,  as  I  have  reason  to  believe,  are 
unanimously  in  favor  of  a  continuance  of  the  present  law. 

Q.    Do  the  class  of  gentlemen,  to  whom  you  have  alluded,  object  to  certain 
provisions  of  the  present  law  as  interfering  much  with  their  private  right  to 
supply  themselves  with  what  they  want  ? 
77 


610  APPENDIX. 

A .  I  have  heard  no  special  discussion  upon  that  point  except  what  I  have 
heard  here  in  this  investigation.  I  have  obtained  more  knowledge  of  the 
views  of  the  people  of  Cambridge  upon  this  question  from  this  investigation 
than  from  any  other  source. 

Q.  If  you  were  to  have  a  law  that  closed  the  public  bars,  but  permitted  all 
hotels  and  victualling  saloons  to  furnish  guests  with  whatever  they  called  for, 
and  groceries  to  furnish  to  customers  to  carry  away  what  their  families  might 
want,  do  you  think  that  such  a  law  for  Boston  and  Cambridge  and  the  vicinity, 
would  operate  as  well  or  better,  or  not  as  well  as  the  present  law  ? 

A.     That  would  depend  very  much  upon  how  the  community  felt  about  it. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  community  would  cordially  co-operate  in  the 
execution  of  such  a  law  as  that  ? 

A.  If  the  community  believed  that  sucli  a  law  would  best  accomplish  the 
purpose  for  which  the  law  was  enacted,  undoubtedly  they  would  give  their 
co-operation.  But  I  think  they  stand  in  this  position, — they  feel  that  the 
present  law  has  not  exhausted  its  potency ;  that  it  is  still  under  trial,  and  that 
its  real  efficiency  has  not  been  carried  out  into  executive  action  sufficiently  to 
fully  test  it.  I  think,  therefore,  if  the  community  generally  were  satisfied  that 
this  law  was  going  to  accomplish  the  purpose,  they  would  prefer  to  have  it 
remain.  If,  however,  they  thought  that  it  was  not  going  to  accomplish  the 
purpose,  they  would  prefer  something  else,  which  would  be  more  effectual. 

Q.  Is  it  not  desirable,  in  your  opinion,  in  making  a  law,  to  remove  from  it 
such  features  as  beget  opposition  and  hinder  its  execution  ? 

A.  Certainly ;  that  is  too  plain  a  proposition  to  be.  questioned  for  a 
moment. 

Q.  Are  there  not  certain  provisions  in  this  law  which  do  beget  that  oppo- 
sition and  which  do  hinder  its  execution  ? 

A.  That  has  been  a  very  prominent  question,  but  I  think  that  one  great 
source  of  embarrassment  has  been  that  the  people  have  not  hitherto  thought 
this  was  to  be  a  stable  law.  If  they  understood  that  the  present  law  was  the 
settled  policy  of  the  Commonwealth,  and  that  there  was  no  probability  of  a 
change,  I  think  there  would  be  greater  efforts  to  execute  it.  As  long  as  the 
question  is  kept  open  and  under  agitation,  these  different  views  in  regard  to 
the  law  will  come  in.  The  policy  of  enacting  a  license  law  involving  the 
necessity  of  appointing  persons  as  agents  to  sell,  introducing  an  element  of 
great  mischief  into  the  municipal  corporations,  the  difficulty  of  making  that 
selection  which  would  be  satisfactory  on  the  one  hand ;  and  the  present  law, 
with  its  State  agencies  upon  the  other,  present  the  simple  problem  to  be 
determined. 

Q.    Is  not  the  question  one  of  great  difficulty  ? 

A.    Undoubtedly  the  most  difficult  in  our  legislation. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  of  this  attempt  to  grapple  with  all  the  difficulties 
and  make  a  clean  reach,  and  make  the  law  as  perfect  as  possible  ?  Must  you 
not  accommodate  the  provisions  of  your  law  and  its  execution  somewhat  to 
public  sentiment  ? 

A.  Undoubtedly  the  law  must  depend  somewhat  upon  the  public  senti- 
ment for  its  enforcement.  The  fact,  however,  is  that  the  law  is  one  of*  the 
best  exponents  of  what  the  public  sentiment  is. 


APPENDIX.  611 

Q.     Do  you  lay  that  down  as  a  general  rule  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  do  not  know  to  what  we  can  better  look,  as  determining 
public  sentiment,  than  to  the  law. 

Q.  Take  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law,  for  instance  ;  was  that  law  in  accordance 
with  the  public  opinion  of  this  country  ? 

A.  I  think  that  it  was  as  long  as  it  existed.  There  were  exceptions,  of 
course,  but  I  think  that  the  people  generally  deemed  it  better  to  continue  the 
law  than  to  overthrow  it. 

Q.  The  only  question  I  ask,  is,  was  it  an  exponent  of  public  opinion  upon 
that  subject  ? 

A.  Taking  all  things  into  consideration  I  think  that  it  must  have  been  ; 
as  a  moral  question  it  was  not. 

Q.  But  was  the  law  an  exponent  of  the  opinion  of  the  people  upon  that 
subject  ? 

A.  I  can  only  answer  the  question  in  the  way  that  I  have  already  done. 
I  think  it  was  not  the  exponent  of  the  highest  moral  sense  of  the  majority  of 
individual  men,  but  I  think  it  was  considered  as  being  the  best  policy  for  the 
time  being. 

Q-  But  may  not  a  law,  by  the  maneuvering  of  members  of  Congress,  or 
other  legislative  bodies,  be  put  upon  the  statute  books,  that  is  not  an  exponent 
of  the  opinion  of  the  people  ? 

A.     No  doubt,  sir. 

Q.     Such  a  law  as  that,  then,  would  not  be  an  exponent  of  public  sentiment  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  but  such  a  law  would  not  long  remain. 

Q.  But  suppose  the  people  disregarded  the  law  and  let  it  remain,  and  did 
not  execute  it.  Is  it  then  an  exponent  of  public  sentiment  ? 

A.  I  think  that  it  is.  For  instance,  in  our  Commonwealth  there  are  cer- 
tain laws  which  are  inoperative.  Take  that  against  lotteries.  They  are 
practised  in  one  way  or  another,  yet  the  general  law  is  against  them,  but  it  is 
not  enforced. 

Q.     The  probability  is  that  public  sentiment  does  not  side  with  the  law  ? 

A.  I  think,  as  a  general  thing,  without  assuming  to  be  very  exact  upon 
the  question,  that  under  our  Constitution,  any  law  that  remains  upon  the 
statute  book,  is  an  expression  of  the  popular  sentiment  of  the  people.  Whether 
that  law  be  right  or  wrong,  is  another  question,  of  course. 

Q.  Is  the  Sunday  law  an  expression  of  popular  sentiment, — the  law  that 
a  man  shall  not  ride  out  on  Sunday,  at  any  time  before  twelve  o'clock  at 
night  ? 

A.    I  really  am  not  aware  that  that  is  a  violation  of  the  Sunday  law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  The  question  is  whether  the  law  itself  is  an 
expression  of  public  sentiment,  and  not  whether  any  particular  act  is  right  or 
wrong. 

A.  I  think  it  is,  sir.  There  is  no  reason  why  the  present  Legislature 
should  not  repeal  that  law  if  it  is  not  an  exponent  of  public  sentiment. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Then  you  would  get  at  the  opinion  of  the  public 
from  the  law  that  remains  upon  the  statute  book,  rather  than  from  universal 
conduct  ? 

A.    That  is,  I  think,  one  of  the  best  tests  of  what  public  opinion  is. 


612  APPENDIX. 

Q.     And  not  tbc  conduct  of  individuals  ? 

A.     No,  sir ;  not  the  conduct  of  particular  individuals. 

Q.     Nor  of  the  great  majority  of  individuals  ? 

A.  Legislation  is  considered  as  an  expression  of  the  will  of  the 
majority. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  opinions  of  the  Mayor  and  City  Government  of 
Cambridge  upon  this  subject  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  have  never  consulted  with  the  Mayor  particularly  upon  this 
subject. 

Q.    Do  you  know  whether  or  not  he  is  in  favor  of  a  license  law  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  have  an  impression,  however,  that  he  probably  may  be  in 
favor  of  a  license  law  ;  but  perhaps  I  ought  not  to  state  even  that,  as  I  really 
have  no  data  from  which  to  speak. 

Q.  Would  it  not  be  easier  for  the  State  Constabulary  to  close  the  liquor- 
places,  and  prevent  the  sale  of  liquor  in  Cambridge,  inasmuch  as  the  people 
could  supply  their  demands  in  Boston  ? 

A.    I  do  not  perceive  that  that  would  make  any  difference. 

Q.  If  the  people  of  Cambridge  were  isolated,  and  could  not  get  what  they 
wanted  to  drink  without  a  great  deal  of  difficulty,  would  they  resort  to  means 
of  supplying  the  demand  ? 

A.  They  would  have  a  great  deal  of  difficulty  in  obtaining  a  supply  to 
replace  what  was  taken  from  them,  and  a  great  deal  of  inconvenience  would 
result ;  but,  undoubtedly,  situated  as  Cambridge  is,  near  to  Boston,  they  could 
replace  their  stock  quite  easily,  and  those  places  which  were  closed  would 
perhaps  be  replenished  and  keep  it  again. 

Q.  But  could  not  the  people  supply  themselves  without  going  to  those 
places  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Mr.  Child  asked  you  whether  a  license,  permit- 
ting hotels  and  grocers  and  victuallers  and  apothecaries,  would  not  be 
preferable  to  the  present  law.  Do  you  not  conceive  that  that  clanse 
concerning  victuallers,  would  cause  victualling-houses  to  degenerate  into 
simple  dram-shops  ? 

A.  That  has  been  the  tendency  of  those  places,  although  lean  conceive 
that  they  could  be  kept  under  such  surveillance  and  espionage  as  to  correct 
that  tendency  ;  but  that  has  unquestionably  been  their  tendency  heretofore. 

Q.  Was  your  present  Mayor  elected  with  any  particular  reference  to  this 
subject  ? 

A.     Not  that  I  know  of. 

Q.    Was  not  the  previous  Mayor  opposed  to  a  license  law  ? 

At.  I  think  that  he  was.  I  should  say  that  a  year  or  two  ago,  previous  to 
the  enforcement  of  the  seizure  clause,  there  was  more  generally  a  feeling  that 
some  change  was  desirable  than  there  is  now. 

Q.  You  think  the  vigorous  enforcement  of  this  law  would  make  friends  to 
the  prohibitory  law  2 

A.  I  think  that  its  enforcement  has  that  tendency.  I  think  the  feeling 
has  changed  very  much  of  late,  and  that  the  people  now  desire  to  see  the 
present  law  in  its  full  operation.  I  think  that  the  vast  majority  of  the  people 


APPENDIX.  613 

are  in  favor  of  doing  something  to  suppress  intemperance.  If  the  present  law 
will  do  it,  they  are  in  favor  of  the  present  law.  If  it  will  not  do  it,  I  think 
they  aro  in  favor  of  some  change. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  know  a  license  law  anywhere  that  did  anything  to  sup- 
press the  sale  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  think  that  in  some  places  they  have  been  somewhat  effective,  but 
how  far  I  cannot  determine.  They  have  at  times  in  a  measure  restricted 
individuals  from  selling ;  whether  such  restriction  has  actually  diminished 
intemperance,  or  the  evils  of  intemperance,  I  cannot  tell. 

Q.     Have  they  ever  really  restricted  the  sellers  ? 

A.  My  recollection  is,  that  formerly  in  Cambridge  the  prosecutions  were 
somewhat  fluctuating;  they  were  spasmodic;  there  would  be  periods  of  a 
few  months  in  which  there  would  be  a  pretty  active  raid  upon  liquor-sellers, 
and  then  a  suspension  of  that  activity.  There  has  never  been,  I  think,  any 
steady  pressure. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  There  have  never,  to  your  knowledge,  been  any 
effective  arrangements  for  carrying  out  that  law  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q-  Would  not  this  same  State  Constabulary  and  the  same  arrangements 
that  we  now  have,  aid  very  much  in  breaking  up  the  unauthorized  sale  of 
liquor  under  a  license  system  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  that  a  license  law  could  be  enforced  to  a  very  consid- 
erable extent  with  the  aid  of  the  State  Constables  ;  unquestionably  they  could 
accomplish  much,  at  least,  in  confining  the  sale  to  authorized  places. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  effect  of  such  a  law,  leaving  licenses  subject  to 
revocation  at  the  pleasure  of  the  power  that  granted  them,  and  holding  the 
parties  strictly  to  the  conditions  of  the  license  granted  ? 

A.  That  would  be  a  very  excellent  provision  in  case  the  policy  was  to 
introduce  that  law.  I  think  it  would  be  a  most  necessary  provision  in  case 
the  law  was  adopted.  As  to  the  expediency  of  such  a  law,  I  am  obliged  to 
say  I  think  the  present  law  has  not  been  so  fully  unfolded  in"  its  operations  as 
to  justify  a  change,  or  to  render  a  change  expedient. 

TESTIMONY  OF  ANDREW  GUSHING. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     You  are  a  city  missionary  ? 

A.  I  am  engaged  in  superintending  the  city  missionaries  of  the  City  Mis- 
sionary Society,  and  am  to  some  extent  a  city  missionary. 

Q.     How  many  persons  are  under  your  direction  ? 

A.     Twenty. 

Q.     Are  they  men  or  women  ? 

A.     They  are  partly  male  and  partly  female. 

Q.     How  many  years  have  you  been  thus  employed  ? 

A.     Twenty-five  years. 

Q.     With  what  class  of  the  community  do  you  labor  ? 

A.    More  especially  among  the  poor,  the  destitute  and  the  vicious. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  as  briefly  as  you  can,  anything  that 
you  may  deem  important,  as  bearing  upon  the  question  here  at  issue  ? 


614  APPENDIX. 

A.  My  experience  coincides  with  that  of  all  who  have  sought  the  moral 
elevation  of  the  poor,  that  intemperance  is  the  great  obstacle  that  we  have 
to  contend  with  ;  that  were  it  not  for  the  use  of  alcoholic  drinks,  the  vocation 
of  missionaries  and  almoners  of  charity,  and  others  of  that  class,  would  be 
well  nigh  gone.  A  very  small  proportion  of  those  who  require  aid,  and  a 
very  small  proportion  of  those  for  whom  it  is  especially  desirable  to  make 
efforts  for  their  moral  improvement,  are  of  the  strictly  temperate  class,  or  of 
those  who  have  not  been  influenced  and  brought  into  their  degradation  by 
the  intemperance  of  others  with  whom  they  associated.  I  believe  that  so  long 
as  liquors  are  sold,  that  there  will  be  intemperance.  I  believe  that  intemper- 
ance is  the  great  cause  of  suffering  and  of  crime  in  our  community,  and 
therefore  it  is  a  great  evil  to  license  and  allow  the  sale  of  that  which  produces 
so  much  evil. 

Q.  So  that  for  the  sake  of  the  interests  of  the  poor,  the  interests  of 
morality  and  religion,  and  for  the  sake  of  the  physical  comfort  of  all  classes 
of  persons,  for  whom  you  labor,  you  earnestly  desire  the  continuance  of  the 
prohibitory  law  and  the  suppression  of  intemperance  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  that  is  my  desire,  and  I  am  confirmed  in  my  favorable 
opinion  of  the  prohibitory  law,  by  the  judgment  of  all  the  missionaries,  I 
think,  without  exception,  with  whom  I  am  connected  in  labor,  and  by  very 
many  others  of  other  associations,  laboring  for  a  similar  cause.  I  have  visited 
many  thousand  families  of  the  poor  in  this  city  during  the  twenty-five  years 
that  I  have  been  engaged  in  missionary  work,  and  have  also  been  an  almoner 
of  other  institutions,  and  connected  with  other  associations  of  a  charitable  and 
eleemosynary  character,  and  my  position  has  necessarily  brought  me  in  con- 
tact with  a  large  number  of  the  poor,  the  intemperate  and  the  vicious. 

Q.  Do  you  perceive  any  way  in  which  a  license,  extended  as  broadly  as  is 
proposed  by  the  petitioners,  could  operate  to  restrain  intemperance  among 
the  class  of  people  for  whom  you  feel  so  much  interest  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  what  the  proposition  of  the  petitioners  is. 

Q.  They  propose  to  grant  licenses  to  hotels,  grocers,  victuallers  and 
apothecaries. 

A.  My  remembrance  of  the  state  of  things  that  existed  under  a  license 
law  in  my  youth,  and  my  knowledge  of  human  nature  leads  me  to  believe 
that  no  license  law,  which  shall  be  stringent  enough  to  restrain  in  general, 
those  habits  of  the  community  which  lead  to  excessive  drinking,  can  ever  be 
enforced;  that  there  would  be  greater  difficulties  in  the  enforcement  of  such 
a  law,  than  in  the  enforcement  of  the  present  prohibitory  law.  If  the  sale  is 
very  general,  the  effect  will  be  the  same,  whether  such  sale  be  licensed  or 
unlicensed.  If  the  sale  is  not  very  general,  the  poorer  classes,  and  those 
whose  vices  and  crimes  are  more  apparent  in  the  community  will  not  be  satis- 
fied. One  of  the  greatest  difficulties  that  we  have  to  contend  with  is  the 
natural  jealousy  of  the  higher  classes  that  exists  among  the  poor.  They  sup- 
pose, oftentimes,  that  they  are  debarred  of  certain  privileges,  because  they 
are  poor,  and  one  of  the  great  efforts  of  missionaries  and  others,  who  seek 
their  elevation,  is  to  satisfy  them  that  the  better  portion  of  the  community 
desire  their  welfare,  and  regard  them  as  brethren,  and  as  entitled  to  every 
right  and  privilege  that  they  enjoy.  If  the  sale  of  liquor  was  confined  to  the 


APPENDIX.  615 

"  better  class,"  as  we  call  them,  the  masses  of  the  poor  would  look  upon  it  as 
invidious.  They  would  protest  against  such  a  state  of  things.  They  would 
take  every  measure  to  obtain  liquor,  and  failing  in  that,  they  would  endeavor 
to  bring  about  a  state  of  public  opinion  which  would  permit  the  free  and 
unrestricted  use  of  intoxicating  liquors. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  such  a  license  law  as  is  contemplated  by  the  peti- 
Uoners  would  be  any  restriction  upon  the  sale  and  use  of  liquor  ?  Would  it 
change  the  present  condition  of  things,  except  to  throw  the  protection  of  the 
law  about  the  trafficker,  leaving  the  sale  and  use  as  unrestrained  as  before  ? 

A.  I  believe  that,  practically,  it  would  be  as  unrestrained  as  now,  and 
perhaps  still  more  so. 

Q.  Have  you  noticed  any  changes  of  late  fjnong  the  ranks  of  those  for 
whom  you  labor,  in  regard  to  the  vice  of  intemperance  ? 

A.  I  think  that  within  the  last  few  years  there  has  been  an  increase  of 
intemperance  in  this  city  both  among  the  poor  and  among  the  rich — among 
all  classes,  perhaps,  I  might  say,  with  the  exception  of  the  more  moral  and 
upright  portion  of  the  commuuity ;  but  I  think  that  there  are  causes  sufficient 
to  account  for  this  increase  without  placing  it  as  one  of  the  results  of  the  pro- 
hibitory law.  During  the  war  there  were  many  of  the  poor  families  who,  from 
bounties  and  other  sources,  had  much  larger  sums  of  money  placed  in  their 
possession  than  usual.  Many  of  them  had  no  habits  of  economy,  their  whole 
course  in  life  having  been  to  spend  all  that  they  could  get  from  day  to  day. 
Very  many  of  the  poor  were  also  in  a  state  of  excitement ;  their  husbands  or 
brothers  or  fathers  were  in  the  army,  which  produced  a  nervous  state  of 
excitement,  leading  to  a  free  use  of  liquor.  It  is  especially  true  of  many 
foreigners,  that  anything  which  grieves  them,  leads  them  to  intemperance.  A 
man,  who  for  the  most  part,  may  be  a  good  citizen,  perhaps,  rarely  indulging 
iu  the  free  use  of  intoxicating  liquor,  in  the  case  of  a  death  in  his  family,  is 
quite  likely  to  become  intoxicated.  I  have  found  that  among  the  foreign  pop- 
ulation, intoxication  is  very  common  under  such  circumstance.  I  think  that 
the  war  produced  that  state  of  excitement,  and  in  connection  with  a  more 
abundant  supply  of  means,  led  to  the  freer  use  of  intoxicating  drinks.  This 
remark  is  especially  true  when  applied  to  the  women. 

Q.  You  think  those  are  two  special  causes  of  the  increase  of  intemperance 
among  the  classes  for  whom  you  labor  ? 

A.  Those  are  the  principal  causes.  The  influence  of  another  class  of  the 
community  in  a  higher  position  has  acted  to  encourage  this ;  I  refer  to  the 
drinking  usages  of  the  wealthy,  a  habit  which  I  am  afraid  is  on  the  increase. 
I  think  that  the  habit  of  drinking  among  young  men  is  to  be  attributed  to  the 
same  cause — the  state  of  excitement  which  was  consequent  upon  the  war. 
Some  of  the  young  men  have  been  in  the  army,  and  others  who  have  not  been 
in  the  army  have  been  under  unnatural  excitement.  The  condition  of  affairs 
incident  upon  the  war  led  to  reckless  expenditure  and  speculation  and  Sab- 
bath-breaking upon  the  part  of  communities ;  I  frequently  hear  the  remark 
made  by  young  men  who  have  been  in  other  parts  of  the  country  that  people 
there  are  not  so  Puritanical  as  in  Massachusetts,  and  therefore  they  like  the 
place  better ;  they  wish  to  be  relieved,  as  far  as  may  be,  from  the  restraints 
of  law  and  of  public  sentiment. 


616  APPENDIX. 

Q.  This  has  not  exclusive  reference  to  the  drinking  usages  of  the 
community  ? 

A.  No,  not  exclusively.  Years  ago  it  was  very  unusual  to  meet  a  man  in 
the  streets  smoking ;  now  you  can  scarcely  go  a  rod,  without  meeting  not  only 
men  but  boys  using  tobacco  freely. 

Q.  Of  what  proportion  of  those  who  receive  aid  from  your  hands  or  from 
the  hands  of  those  under  your  direction,  are  native  Americans  ? 

A.  The  society  with  which  I  am.more  immediately  connected — the  Boston 
City  Missionary  Society — is  primarily  a  religious  society,  and  only  incidentally 
eleemosynary. 

Q.     Therefore  your  labors  are  chiefly  confined  to  Americans  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir :  but  for  about  twenty  years  I  have  been  one  of  a  committee 
of  the  Howard  Benevolent  Society,  and  have  been  brought  in  contact  with 
the  poor  through  that  agency,  and  the  applications  for  aid  to  that  society 
have  been  very  largely  from  foreigners,  but  I  am  not  able  to  say  in  what 
proportion. 

Q.     Would  you  think  it  more  or  less  than  seventy-five  per  cent.  ? 

A.  The  Howard  Benevolent  Society  was  organized  more  especially  to  aid 
the  poor  who  had  seen  better  days,  and  to  a  considerable  extent  it  confines  its 
charity  to  a  better  class  of  the  poor,  though  not  exclusively  by  any  means. 
In  some  wards  I  suppose  that  seventy-five  per  cent,  of  the  persons  relieved 
are  foreigners ;  in  others  it  is  a  less  proportion.  In  reference  to  the  general 
charity,  I  should  say  that  more  than  three-fourths,  perhaps  seven-eighths,  is 
called  for  by  the  foreign  population. 

Q.     That  is,  taking  the  charities  of  the  city  as  a  whole  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  any  expression  of  desire  upon  the  part  of  those  who 
were  the  subject  of  your  labors,  in  regard  to  the  banishment  of  liquors  and  the 
removal  of  the  temptation  from  them  ? 

A.  Very  often.  Many  of  them  are  temperate,  but  have  suffered  in  their 
families  from  intemperance,  and  they  deprecate  the  increase  of  temptation, 
and  often  express  the  wish  that  the  sale  of  liquor  might  be  stopped. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Do  you  know  anything  in  regard  to  the  extent  of 
the  sale  of  liquor  among  the  poor  ? 

A.  I  cannot  give  any  definite  answer.  I  can  only  say  the  places  are  very 
many  where  liquor  can  be  obtained.  I  am  speaking  now  of  the  past  few 
years,  and  not  of  any  particular  date. 

Q.  The  places  are  right  around  them,  are  they  not,  and  in  the  portions  of 
the  city  where  the  poorer  classes  live  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is  not  necessary  for  a  man  to  go  far  to  obtain  liquor  in 
Boston.  I  think  sometimes  that  the  poor  prefer  to  be  in  those  parts  of  the 
city  where  it  is  sold.  The  question  has  often  been  asked,  whether,  if  the 
liquor  places  were  closed  in  one  locality,  and  left  open  in  a  neighboring 
locality,  the  use  of  liquor  would  be  diminished  ?  My  own  judgment  is,  that  it 
would  not.  They  have  a  wonderful  ingenuity  in  finding  places  where  it  is 
sold,  although  I  find  it  very  difficult  sometimes  to  teach  them  where  to  find 
the  house  of  God.  They  never  know  the  street  in  that  case,  and  have  no 


APPENDIX.  617 

acquaintance  with  the  locality ;  but  they  have  no  difficulty  in  finding  a  place 
where  they  can  obtain  liquor. 

Q.    Do  they  carry  liquor  into  their  houses  ? 

A.     Some  of  them  do  ? 

Q.     Do  you  see  any  intemperance  among  the  women  and  children  ? 

A.  I  think  there  has  been  an  increase  of  intemperance  among  the  women 
within  the  last  few  years. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  held  your  present  position  ? 

A.    Twenty-five  years. 

Q.  During  the  time  you  have  held  that  position,  has  there  been  an  increase, 
or  a  decrease  of  intemperance  ?  Is  there  more  or  less  intemperance  among  the 
poorer  classes  now  than  there  was  twenty  years  ago  ? 

A.  There  has  been  a  very  great  increase  of  population,  and  that  increase 
has  been  very  largely  of  a  foreign  element.  The  native  American  population 
of  the  city  is  nearly  stationary,  I  suppose.  The  foreign  element  has  increased 
very  largely.  There  have  been  a  great  many  who  were  in  the  habit  of  drink- 
ing, in  the  towns  and  in  the  rural  districts,  that  have  flocked  to  the  city,  where 
their  wants  can  be  supplied.  It  is  very  difficult  to  draw  a  comparison  between 
one  period  and  another.  I  think  there  has  been  more  intemperance  in 
amount,  but  whether  there  has  been  in  proportion  to  the  increase  of  the 
American  population  I  think  is  very  doubtful. 

Q.  Has  there  been  an  increase  of  drinking  among  the  young  men  and 
among  people  in  the  higher  walks  of  life  ? 

A.  I  have  less  opportunity  to  judge;  but,  so  far  as  I  have  observed,  my 
impression  is  that  there  has  been  an  increase  within  a  few  years,  in  the  habits 
of  drinking,  among  what  is  called  the  better  portion  of  society. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  FAY.)  How  would  it  be  with  the  middle  class  of  our 
American  population  ? 

A.  It  is  very  difficult  to  draw  a  line  between  classes  when  we  have  no 
classes,  or  ought  to  have  none  in  the  community.  Those  who  are  regarded  as 
the  higher  classes  are  often  really  the  lower. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  I  do  not  like  any  distinctions.  I  do  not  believe  in 
classes  of  any  sort,  except  where  the  distinction  is  based  on  good  morals  and 
upright  conduct. 

A.  I  believe  that  men  of  good  morals  and  upright  conduct,  are  generally 
total  abstinence  men. 

Q.  And  they  would  be,  whether  there  was  any  law  or  not,  whether  there 
was  a  prohibitory  or  a  license  law  ? 

A .  Those  who  have  arrived  at  years  of  maturity,  and  perhaps,  passed  into 
middle  life  with  confirmed  habits,  I  suppose  would  be  able  to  maintain  their 
habits  of  sobriety ;  but  their  children,  with  the  temptation  that  surround  them, 
and  young  men  coming  from  the  country  where  they  have  not  been  under  the 
temptations  which  exist  here,  I  am  afraid  would  be  very  likely  to  grow  up  in 
intemperance,  so  that  the  temperate  class  thirty  years  hence  would  be  much 
smaller  than  at  the  present  time. 

Q.    Is  it  not,  after  all,  a  question  whether  any  law  can  be  so  enforced  as  to 
get  rid  of  liquor  and  its  use  ?     No  effect  will  be  produced  by  law  unless  it 
operates  to  stop  the  sale  of  liquor  ? 
78 


618  APPENDIX. 

A.  A  law  upon  the  statute  book,  unless  enforced,  will  be  nothing;  but  I 
believe  the  law  has  an  influence  in  curtailing  the  amount  of  liquor  drank. 

Q.  Do  you  not  believe  that  liquor  has  been  largely  bought  by  people  of 
respectable  standing  in  society,  in  violation  of  this  law  ? 

A.     I  have  no  special  means  of  judging. 

Q.     What  is  your  opinion  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  but  that  there  are  a  great  many  men  in  the  community 
who,  in  the  main,  are  temperate,  and  good  citizens,  that  for  culinary  and  other 
purposes  purchase  liquor. 

Q.  If  you  could  supply  the  demand  for  proper  purposes,  and  exclude 
liquor  for  improper  purposes,  would  it  not  add  force  to  the  law  ? 

A.  If,  by  any  law,  the  use  of  alcoholic  stimulants  could  be  confined  to  the 
arts  and  to  cooking,  I  have  no  doubt  that  intemperance  would  diminish. 

Q.     Do  you  believe  that  is  possible  under  any  state  of  law  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Then  is  it  not  a  fact  that  we  want  that  law  which,  under  a  proper  state 
of  things,  will  go  the  farthest  towards  confining  alcohol  to  its  proper  uses  ? 

A.  Not  necessarily.  The  responsibility,  it  seems  to  me,  should  be  left  with 
the  man  that  sells,  and  he  should  take  the  consequences  from  the  hand  of  man 
and  from  the  hand  of  God.  I  think  it  is  not  necessary  or  proper  for  the  Legisla- 
ture or  the  people  through  the  Legislature  to  protect  a  man  in  doing  that 
which  will  produce  a  great  amount  of  evil,  without  any  corresponding  amount 
of  good. 

Q.  The  question  seems  to  be  this :  This  liquor  is  an  article  of  commerce, 
made  so  by  the  laws  of  the  government ;  now,  if  the  Legislature  seek  to 
restrain  the  sale,  believing  that  thereby  they  can  root  out  the  evil  of  intem- 
perance, and  they  do  restrain  that  evil  as  far  as  they  can,  do  they  thereby 
become  responsible  for  the  portion  they  do  not  restrain  ? 

A.     A  license  is  something  more  than  a  restraint ;  it  is  a  permission  to  do. 

Q.  The  proposition  is  this :  The  Legislature,  seeing  that  the  common  use 
of  liquor  produces  evil,  look  to  see  how  far  it  can  be  restrained,  and  deter- 
mine that  they  will  restrain  it  to  a  certain  limit ;  do  they  thereby  sanction 
the  portion  that  they  do  not  restrain  ? 

A.  If  they  allow  any  man  to  sell  for  the  purpose  of  beverage,  they  do.  li 
any  man  is  allowed  to  sell  intoxicating  liquor  as  a  beverage,  and  is  protected 
by  the  government  in  that  sale,  he  paying  a  certain  sum  therefor,  the  govern- 
ment thereby  becomes  responsible  for  any  evil  which  may  result  therefrom. 

Q.  If  the  government  makes  a  law  restraining  such  sale,  does  it  thereby 
become  responsible  for  the  evils,  resulting  from  the  sale,  that  it  does  not 
restrain  ? 

A.     The  government  is  responsible  if  it  protects  any  man  in  the  sale. 

Q.  A  man  is  protected  by  his  common  right ;  he  has  a  common  right  to 
sell  an  article  of  commerce,  that  is  made  an  article  of  commerce  by  the  laws 
and  constitution  of  the  United  States. 

A.  If  there  was  a  common  right  existing,  I  should  not  suppose  that  there 
was  any  necessity  for  granting  licenses. 

Q.  Without  any  law  upon  the  subject,  every  man  would  have  the  right  to 
sell  this  article  of  commerce  as  freely  as  he  does  sugar,  tea  or  coffee. 


APPENDIX.  619 

A .     lie  would  have  a  legal  right,  but  no  moral  right. 

Q.  I  am  speaking  of  the  legal  right.  Now,  if  the  Legislature  undertake 
to  restrain  the  sale,  and  have  done  so  as  far  as  they  can,  and  intend  to  do  it 
still,  do  they  thereby  sanction  what  they  do  not  restrain  ? 

A .  Perhaps  if  the  Legislature  should  pass  a  law  that  persons  who  sold 
under  such  and  such  circumstances  should  be  amenable  and  liable  to  punish- 
ment, the  government  might  not  be  responsible  for  that  which  was  sold.  But  if 
there  is  any  allowance,  upon  the  part  of  the  government,  of  the  right  to  sell, 
and  protection  is  given  in  that  right,  then  I  think  it  is  responsible. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  its  being  more  difficult  to  execute  a  license  law  than  the 
present  law ;  would  not  the  present  prohibitory  law  be  equally  effective  in 
breaking  up  all  unauthorized  sales,  if  some  were  permitted  to  sell  ? 

A.  I  think  not.  I  think  that  a  license  law  would  increase  the  difficulties. 
I  think  it  has  an  injurious  effect  upon  the  community  to  let  men  of  promi- 
nence go  unpunished,  when  those  of  far  less  intelligence  and  importance,  who 
have  broken  the  law,  are  punished ;  but  it  seems  to  be  the  custom  of  society  to 
treat  large  swindlers  with  greater  leniency  than  those  who  swindle  in  less 
amounts. 

Q.  Then,  I  suppose,  you  think  that  the  action  of  the  State  Constabulary 
is  not  proper,  if  they  close  the  lesser,  and  not  the  larger  places  where  liquor 
is  sold  ? 

A.  I  think  they  should  all  be  closed,  and  it  is  only  a  question  of  expedi- 
ency where  they  begin. 

Q.  Is  not  that  one  of  the  great  difficulties  that  surround  the  whole  sub- 
ject ;  the  law  undertakes  to  assume  so  much  and  fails  to  accomplish  it  ? 

A.  I  do  not  believe  that  the  law  has  made  matters  worse,  even  in  Boston  ; 
certainly  it  has  not  in  the  country.  There,  there  has  been  a  more  marked 
improvement.  But  even  if  it  had,  there  would  not,  therefore,  necessarily  be 
any  wisdom  in  repealing  the  law.  I  suppose  that  the  law  of  nations,  which 
made  the  African  slave-trade  piracy,  increased  the  vigor  of  that  trade,  and 
that  thousands  found  a  watery  grave  who  would  have  arrived  safely  on  our 
shores,  if  the  law  had  not  been  in  operation. 

Q.  St.  Paul's  rule  was  not  to  do  evil  that  good  might  come  ;  do  you  hold 
the  reverse  of  that  to  be  true,  that  it  is  right  to  do  good  that  evil  may  come  ? 

A.     It  is  not  right  to  wish  evil  in  any  way. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  The  question  assumes  that  evil  will  come  out  of 
good.  Is  there  any  such  connection  between  the  doing  of  good  as  a  cause, 
and  evil  flowing  from  it  as  an  effect  ? 

A.  It  never  follows  as  an  effect,  properly,  though  good  may  be,  and  often 
is,  the  occasion  of  evil. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     In  such  a  case,  is  it  best  to  continue  the  good  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  The  gospel  of  Christ  has  been  the  occasion  of  a  great  deal  of 
evil  as  well  as  of  a  great  deal  of  good  in  the  world,  but  I  think  it  ought  to  be 
continued. 

Q.  If  the  law  does  not  check  the  evil  at  all,  though  well  intended  and 
good  in  its  principle,  is  it  wise  to  continue  it  ? 

A.  The  law,  in  my  judgment,  has  not  had  a  fair  trial.  The  authorities 
have  not  seemed,  in  years  past,  to  manifest  any  great  desire  to  enforce  the  law. 


620  APPENDIX. 

Those  who  have  been  convicted  of  violations,  have  appealed,  and  the  cases 
have  been  carried  up  from  court  to  court,  and  the  question  of  the  enforcement 
of  the  law  has  never  been  considered  as  settled.  I  therefore  wish  to  give  a 
longer  opportunity  for  a  fair  trial.  I  believe  that  if  all  temperance  men  and 
all  who  profess  to  desire  the  promotion  of  the  cause  of  temperance  would  be 
united  in  their  efforts  in  vigorously  enforcing  the  law,  we  should  soon  have 
very  different  results  from  any  that  we  have  yet  seen. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Since  it  foas  been  claimed  by  the  authorities  of  the 
city,  for  so  many  years,  that  the  law  could  not  be  enforced,  do  you  think  it 
unwise  in  the  Constabulary  to  attack  the  enemy  in  the  weakest  place  and  get 
the  public  accustomed  to  the  operation  of  the  law,  and  thus  pave  the  way  to  its 
complete  enforcement  ? 

A.  I  can  conceive  that  such  may  be  the  best  course,  though  I  have  had 
no  experience  in  such  matters. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  GEORGE  TRASK. 
Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     Do  you  reside  in  Fitchburg  ? 
A.    I  do. 

Q.     You  are  a  minister  of  the  gospel  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    You  have  been  in  the  habit  of  travelling  about  the  State,  I  suppose  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  have  for  eighteen  years  been  travelling  through  this  State 
and  portions  of  other  States. 

Q.  Will  you  give  your  judgment  of  the  sentiment  of  the  religious  people 
and  of  the  clergymen,  so  far  as  you  are  acquainted  with  it,  upon  the  subject 
of  temperance  ? 

A.  I  mingle  with  different  denominations  of  clergymen,  and  stand  in  their 
pulpits.  I  mingle  with  every  denomination  except  the  Catholic,  and  I 
might  except  one  other,  and  my  impression  is  that  the  main  body  of  Christian 
ministers,  with  the  exception  perhaps  of  Catholics,  and  possibly,  one  other 
denomination,  are  in  favor  of  the  present  prohibitory  law,  in  the  proportion 
of  nineteen  to  twenty.  I  affirm  this  upon  the  basis  that  I  mingle  with  them. 
I  see  them  at  the  religious  conventions,  and  at  the  temperance  conventions, 
and  think  that  I  affirm  whereof  I  know.  And  what  is  true  of  the  clergymen 
of  the  various  denominations,  is,  in  my  judgment,  true  of  religious  people 
generally,  of  serious  people,  of  devout  people.  On  the  whole,  they  have  con- 
fidence in  this  prohibitory  law  ;  they  do  not  deem  it  perfect,  I  presume,  but 
they  have  confidence  in  it.  They  do  not  believe  that  it  has  had  a  fair  trial. 
I  do  not  believe  that  it  has  had  a  fair  trial,  and  I  will  give  some  reasons  why 
I  think  that  it  has  not  had  a  fair  trial.  The  general  wish  is  that  the  law  may 
have  a  fair  trial  before  we  go  further. 

Q.  Do  the  people  feel  encouraged  by  the  operations  of  the  State  Con- 
stabulary ? 

A.  I  think  that  encouragement  is  taken  'by  very  many  people  in  that  par- 
ticular direction  ;  indeed  I  do.  I  think  that  the  law  has  worked  well  in  the 
counties  where  I  have  been  particularly  conversant.  I  think  that  the  law  has 
swept  the  dram-shops  clean  from  some  portions  of  counties  and  from  some 
whole  towns.  I  do  not  mean  that  it  has  done  all  of  its  work  ;  but  it  is  on  the 


APPENDIX.  621 

way,  doing  its  work.  I  ought  to  say,  as  I  am  engaged  in  advocating  this  law, 
that  I  am  not  advocating  a  law  that  shall  make  the  rumseller  responsible,  as 
an  editor  is  responsible  for  a  libel,  or  as  a  railroad  is  responsible  for  broken 
bones.  I  say  that  I  am  not  advocating  a  law  like  that.  I  have  fallen  under 
the  imputation  of  advocating  a  license  law.  A  very  jocose  editor,  in  a  very 
jocose  manner,  has  published  that  the  "  anti-tobacco  apostle  has  said  that  he 
was  in  favor  of  a  license  law."  I  have  suffered  a  little  in  that  direction.  I 
do  not  mean  to  throw  any  imputation  in  any  direction  by  making  this  remark. 
I  have  decided  opinions  on  this  matter  of  temperance — having  looked  at 
it  for  a  great  many  years.  I  have  been  with  my  friend,  brother  Child,  a 
great  many  years  in  this  matter.  I  came  up  under  the  economy  of  a  license 
law.  One  of  the  best  men  in  the  town  sold  rum — doctors,  justices  of  the 
peace  and  the  like,  all  sold  it.  I  and  my  fellow-boys  went  and  bought  it.  We 
drank  it,  and  our  friends  went  and  bought  it  and  drank  it,  and  drank  it  freely. 
We  all  drank  it,  and  sometimes  drank  too  much.  We  all  got  a  little  boozy, 
and  generally,  fifty  years  ago,  we  were  all  so  boozy  that  we  did  not  know  that 
we  were  boozy  at  all. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Do  you  mean  all  ? 

A.  I  will  qualify  that.  I  will  say  this,  that  the  license  law,  under  which  I 
was  born,  was  practised  under  the  very  best  of  circumstances.  If  we  had 
any  good  men  in  the  community  to  sell  rum,  we  had  them  to  sell  it,  we  had 
the  solid  ones  to  sell  it.  If  there  was  ever  any  such  a  thing  as  good  rum — the 
real  St.  Croix,  beautiful  and  slippery  and  oily — we  had  it,  and  got  drunk 
upon  it.  My  playmates  got  drunk  upon  it,  and  some  of  them  went  down  to 
their  graves  drunkards.  In  view  of  .that,  by  the  grace  of  God,  I  am  here  to 
speak  to  you  upon  this  point.  I  went  through  a  splendid  economy  once — an 
economy  that  made  me  and  my  boys  all  drunkards,  to  some  extent,  and  it 
made  the  nation  a  nation  of  drunkards.  We  had  the  best  license  law  in  this 
world — a  law  under  which  godly  men  sold  rum,  and  no  others,  and  sold  it 
with  great  care,  and  we  all  got  drunk.  I  do  not  believe  that  we  reach  results 
at  once.  We  are  slow ;  we  are  all  of  us  slow.  The  Patriarchal  economy, 
the  Jewish  economy,  and  the  Christian  economy,  so  we  come.  So  we  have 
economies  in  temperance.  We  may  depend  upon  that.  Now,  whether  that 
economy  of  brother  Child  is  to  be  ranked  as  an  economy  or  not,  I  am  not 
going  to  state ;  but  I  say  that  this  prohibitory  law  stands,  in  my  mind,  as  an 
economy.  I  do  not  mean  by  this  that  there  may  not  be  something  better.  I 
am  going  for  something  higher.  It  is  this  :  that  the  man  who  sells  rum,  as  he 
has  the  money  for  it,  the  profits  of  it,  the  advantages  of  it,  must  abide  the 
consequences.  I  would  say  to  him  :  "  You  have  a  right  to  sell  rum,  if  you 
do  not  trespass  upon  my  rights ; "  and  I  speak  to  my  brother  Child,  as  a 
lawyer,  and  ask  him  whether  there  is  not  a  law  as  old  as  the  world,  just  like 
this,  "Enjoy  your  rights,  but  don't  you  trespass  upon  mine."  Now,  I  say  to 
the  rumseller,  under  any  circumstance  :  "  You  are  trespassing  upon  my  rights  ; 
you  are  manufacturing  paupers;  you  are  manufacturing  firemen  to  burn 
my  barns.  Sir,  enjoy  your  rights,  but  I  prosecute  you  upon  the  score  of 
trespass.  I  drag  you  up  by  the  old  law  of  nature,  under  which  you  hold 
your  rights,  and  tell  you  not  to  trespass  upon  mine."  I  do  not  mean  by  this 
that  I  would  not  carry  this  law  of  prohibition  higher  and  higher  \  but  I 


622  APPENDIX. 

would  have  a  law  (and  shall  have  it  by  and  by),  that  every  man  shall  be 
responsible  for  what  he  does.  We  shall  get  up  to  a  higher  economy  and  shall 
prevent  the  business. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Is  the  sentiment  of  the  people  of  this  State,  so 
far  as  you  know,  decidedly  in  favor  of  prohibition,  instead  of  a  license  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  the  people  that  I  mingle  with  are. 

Q.     How  is  it  taking  the  mass  of  people  generally,  as  far  as  you  can  judge  ? 

A.  Well,  I  represent  the  representatives  of  the  mass.  I  say  that  the 
people  of  this  State  generally,  who  are  friendly  to  Christ,  who  are  friendly  to 
sound,  beautiful,  and  elevated  morals,  who  are  favorable  to  liberty  and  truth, 
morality  and  reform,  I  say  that  the  most  of  them,  nineteen  out  of  twenty, 
arc  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory  law.  Some  of  us  have  gone  higher,  and  wish 
something  higher,  but  we  are  going  to  have  the  prohibitory  law  carried 
through ;  we  are  not  going  to  give  it  up. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Do  you  think  that  there  ought  to  be  a  law  against 
chewing  tobacco  ? 

A.  Brother  Child,  I  told  you  before  I  took  the  stand,  that  if  you  should 
ask  me  that  question  I  would  not  say  a  word  about  it.  I  am  not  bound  to 
answer  that  question.  Do  not  ask  me  that  question  because  I  do  not  want  to 
lie.  I  told  you  that  I  would  not  answer  any  such  question. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  are  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law  ;  arc  you  not  in 
favor  of  a  law  that  will  most  effectually  check  the  evils  of  intemperance  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.    You  are  not  in  favor  of  any  particular  law  are  you  ? 

A.  I  am  too  much  of  a  man  to  be  weeded  to  any  sectionality.  I  merely 
go  for  the  simple  right. 

Q.  Is  it  not  really  a  question  whether  there  may  not  be  modifications  of 
this  law  which  would  render  it  more  effective  than  it  is  now,  in  the  city  of 
Boston,  and  in  other  parts  of  the  Commonwealth  ? 

A.  I  reply  very  directly  to  this  very  proper  question,  that  I  see  that 
human  nature  is  the  same  in  Fitchburg  that  human  nature  is  in  Boston  ;  that 
the  gospel  of  Christ  is  the  same  in  one  place  that  it  is  in  the  other ;  therefore 
I  say  that  the  law  should  be  the  same  in  one  place  that  it  is  in  the  other,  or 
else  we  shall  get  into  interminable  difficulties. 

Q.  Do  I  understand  you,  then,  that  if  any  modification  of  this  law  would 
make  it  more  efficient,  taking  the  world  as  it  is,  and  enable  it  better  to  effect 
the  object  intended,  that  you  would  be  in  favor  of  that  modification  ? 

A.  Upon  the  supposition  that  those  modifications  are  not  a  compromise 
with  anything  immoral  or  sinful.  I  should  say  that  it  becomes  us  all  to  be 
looking  upon  this  question  to  see  if  we  can  accommodate  matters. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  it  a  sin,  under  all  circumstances,  to  sell  wine,  cider, 
and  spirituous  liquors  ? 

A.  I  think  that  a  man  who  is  deputized  by  the  government  to  sell  wine, 
brandy  and  other  drinks,  has  a  right  to  sell  to  me  if  I  produce  a  bit  of  paper 
from  a  respectable  physician,  stating  that  I  need  it. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  it  is  a  sin  to  sell,  under  every  circumstance,  with- 
out that  "  bit  of  papet  ?  " 


APPENDIX.  623 

A.  When  a  man  is  in  perfect  health,  and  does  not  need  cider,  nor  any- 
thing stronger,  he  does  not  need  that  intoxicating  principle  that  is  found  in 
cider.  If  he  does  not  need  it,  it  will  injure  him,  and  because  it  will  injure 
him,  it  is  immoral  and  sinful  for  him  to  use  it. 

Q.  The  question  that  I  wish  you  to  answer,  is  this :  Is  it  under  every  cir- 
cumstance, a  sin  to  sell  a  glass  of  cider  for  a  beverage  ? 

A.  I  answer,  that  if  the  laws  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts 
prohibit  the  selling  of  strong  or  intoxicating  drinks,  it  is  a  sin,  because  the 
transgression  of  the  law  is  a  sin  in  all  cases. 

Q.     The  transgression  of  what  law  do  you  refer  to  ? 

A.    The  laws  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts. 

Q.     Always  ? 

A.     The  transgression  of  the  law  is  sin. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  the  transgression  of  every  law  that  we  have  upon 
the  statute  books,  is  a  sin  ? 

A.     Can  you  specify  a  law  which  it  is  not  a  sin  to  transgress  ? 

Q.  Would  the  transgression  of  a  law  that  should  go  against  the  Christian 
religion,  be  a  sin  ? 

A.     There  is  no  such  law. 

Q.     But  suppose  there  was  ? 

A.    I  would  stamp  it  under  foot. 

Q.  So  I  supposed.  The  question  then  returns  :  Is  it  a  sin  to  sell  a  glass 
of  cider  as  a  beverage  ?  I  should  like  to  have  you  answer  it. 

A.     When  a  man  does  not  need  that  beverage  it  is  a  sin. 

Q.     It  is  a  sin  then,  to  sell  him  what  he  does  not  need  ? 

A.  It  is  a  sin  to  sell  him  what  he  does  not  need,  and  when  it  will  not  bene- 
fit him.  The  magnitude  of  the  sin  is  another  question. 

Q.     Who  is  to  be  the  judge  of  what  a  man  needs  ? 

A.     A  man's  conscience. 

Q.     You  are  not,  then,  to  judge  for  me  nor  I  for  you  ? 

A.     That  may  be. 

Q.     You  agree  to  that,  do  you  not  ? 

A.     That  may  be. 

Q.     But  is  that  not  true  ? 

A.     Well,  sometimes  it  is  true ;  but  a  man  may  be  wrong  even  when  he  is* 
conscientious.     Paul  was  wrong  when  he  was  conscientious,  and  you  may  be 
wrong  if  you  drink  cider. 

Q.  You,  then,  decline  to  answer  whether  the  drinking  of  cider  as  a  bever- 
age is,  in  every  case  a  sin. 

A.     No,  I  do  not ;  I  decline  nothing.     . 

Q.     Is  it  then,  a  sin  per  se,  in  your  opinion  ? 

A.  In  every  case  where  a  man  is  properly  informed  of  the  nature  of  cider, 
and  then  sells  it  to  a  man  who  does  not  need  it,  he  does  wrong.  He  is  tres- 
passing upon  the  rights  of  a  man,  because  he  is  injuring  him. 

Q.     Is  it  wrong  in  all  cases  to  sell  or  drink  a  glass  of  wine  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.     If  I  were  sick,  I  would  drink  a  gallon  if  the  doctor  told  me  to. 

Q.  I  am  not  speaking  of  sickness.  Do  you  believe  that  it  is  wrong  to 
drink  a  glass  of  wine  as  a  beverage  ? 


624  APPENDIX. 

A.    I  do,  as  a  beverage. 

Q.     Do  you  believe  that  it  is  a  sin  ? 

A.  I  do  believe  it  to  be  a  sin,  firstly,  because  I  believe  intoxicating  -wines 
to  be  injurious  to  the  human  system  ;  secondly,  it  is  wrong,  from  the  beauti- 
ful principle  that  if  meat  make  my  brother  to  offend,  I  will  eat  no  more 
forever. 

Q.    Is  tho  act  wrong  in  itself,  or  is  it  wrong  in  its  tendency  ? 

A.    It  is  wrong  relatively,  and  wrong  in  itself. 

Q.  I  want  to  ask  you  one  question  more;  if,  in  your  judgment,  the  fact 
as  to  whether  a  law  can  or  cannot  be  executed,  is  not  a  fair  consideration  to 
be  taken  into  account  in  judging  of  the  expediency  of  an  enactment,  or  of 
the  expediency  of  continuing  an  enactment  ? 

A.  That  question  has  been  so  beautifully  answered  by  the  judge  from 
Cambridge,  that  it  seems  to  me  that  I  had  better  not  answer  it. 

Q.    What  is  your  opinion  ? 

A.     Just  the  same  as  his. 

Q.     What  is  his  ? 

A.  That  when  we  have  a  law  like  the  prohibitory  law,  which  commands 
upon  the  whole,  as  he  thinks,  the  approval  of  the  majority,  all  good  men 
should  turn  in  upon  its  side,  and  press  it  right  through. 

Q.     Suppose  they  will  not  do  that,  what  will  you  do  in  that  case  ? 

A.  We  will  give  them  light  and  love,  until  they  do.  We  are  going  to 
have  the  law,  and  then  wrap  it  around  with  light  and  love,  and  send  it  ahead. 
We  are  not  going  upon  pure  legality.  If  we  men,  who  are  for  the  prohibi- 
tory law,  are  strong  in  the  gospel  of  Christ,  we  shall  go  ahead.  I  say  with  all 
reverence,  and  without  fear  of  contradiction,  that  where  the  law  exists,  where 
men  are  earnestly  for  it,  that  we  have  the  moral  power,  the  love,  the  light  and 
the  prayer,  to  put  it  through.  If  we  wrap  this  law  around  with  light  and 
love,  and  say  that  it  is  Christ's  law,  and  we  mean  to  press  it  through,  we  will 
do  it. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  operation  of  the  State  Constabulary,  is  an  exhibi- 
tion of  "  light  and  love  "  in  the  gospel  sense  ? 

A.  I  have  not  the  pleasure  of  being  acquainted  with  those  gentlemen, 
but  what  I  do  know  of  them,  I  think  is  certainly  in  their  favor. 

Q.  Is  that  your  idea  of  the  "  light  and  love "  that  is  to  put  this  law 
through  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     What  is  it? 

A.  It  is  that  we  should  have  the  grip  and  grandeur  of  the  law,  to  seize 
upon  these  villains  that  are  trespassing  upon  the  laws,  and  then,  with  our  pul- 
pits, our  altars,  our  hearts,  and  our  voices  to  say — "  Let's  put  it  through." 
Let  us  do  it  affectionately,  earnestly  and  lovingly,  and  let  the  rumseller 
understand  that  we  come  to  him  with  the  law,  and  yet  we  come  to  him  with 
Christ,  and  full  of  love ;  let  us  say  to  him,  We  are  going  to  prosecute  you, 
but  we  are  going  to  do  it  in  love. 

Q.     And  as  an  evidence  of  your  love  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  as  an  evidence  of  our  love. 


APPENDIX.  625 

TESTIMONY  OF  SAMUEL  W.  HODGES. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MIXER.)     You  are  a  member  of  the  City  Council  of  Boston  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     For  how  long  have  you  been  ? 

A.     This  is  my  second  year. 

Q.     Are  you  connected  with  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Temperance  ? 

A.    I  am,  and  have  been  for  twenty-one  years. 

Q.     And  conversant  with  temperance  organizations  generally  ? 

A.     I  think  so. 

Q.  Will  you  state,  as  briefly  as  you  can,  what  you  think  will  be  of  service 
in  the  discussion  before  us  ? 

A.  My  temperance  observations  only  go  back  to  the  time  of  my  original 
connection  with  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Temperance,  about  twenty-one  years 
ago.  I  do  not  know  that  prior  to  that  time  I  ever  took  any  particular  pains 
to  instruct  myself  upon  the  temperance  movements.  Since  that  time  I  have 
endeavored  to  keep  myself  conversant  with  all  the  temperance  movements  in 
the  vicinity  in  which  I  live. 

Q.     Where  do  you  live  ? 

A.  I  came  to  this  city  twenty  years  ago.  I  had  previously  lived  here,  but 
after  an  absence  returned  here  in  1847,  and  now  reside  in  Boston.  At  one 
time  I  resided  in  Stoughton,  Norfolk  County.  The  sentiment  of  the  people 
of  that  town  was  not  particularly  on  the  side  of  temperance ;  certainly  it  was 
not  on  the  side  of  prohibition.  From  the  time  of  the  commencement  of  the 
prohibitory  law  agitation,  the  minds  of  the  people  became  more  awakened, 
and  at  the  time  of  the  passage  of  the  law,  a  very  large  majority  of  the  people 
of  that  town  were  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law.  I  think  that  the  sentiment 
of  the  people  has  continued  to  advance  in  that  respect,  from  that  time  to  this, 
and  I  think  that  to-day  the  majority  of  the  people  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory 
law  is  greater  than  it  was  in  1853  or  '54. 

I  am  in  correspondence  with  almost  every  town  in  Massachusetts,  and  the 
remark  that  I  make  in  regard  to  Stoughton,  will  apply  almost  universally  to 
the  towns  of  the  Commonwealth,  of  a  less  number  of  inhabitants  than  ten 
thousand.  I  am  not  prepared,  perhaps,  to  make  the  same  statement  of  towns 
of  greater  population,  and  with  good  facilities  for  getting  intoxicating  liquors 
from  Boston.  I  have  observed  that  there  is  no  interest  advocated,  no  com- 
mercial interest,  no  property  interest,  that  brings  out  so  much  feeling  on  the 
part  of  men,  as  does  the  advocacy  of  their  interest  in  the  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors.  I  find  that  men  connected  with  that  interest  will  say  and  do  things, 
that  I  believe  they  would  be  ashamed  to  say  or  do  in  connection  with  any 
other  business  in  the  world. 

When  I  first  came  to  Boston  I  was  in  the  habit  of  attending  church  down 
town.  I  noticed  then,  as  I  would  pass  down  Washington  Street,  there  were  a 
large  number  of  places  for  the  sale  of  liquors  and  tobacco  and  cigars,  open 
on  the  Sabbath  day,  although  I  never  noticed  that  any  persons  connected 
with  the  dry-goods,  or  similar  business,  kept  their  stores  open,  and  was  told 
that  if  such  persons  did  keep  their  places  open  on  the  Sabbath,  they  would 
be  brought  before  the  court.  Liquor-sellers,  however,  were  allowed  to  keep 
their  places  open.  During  the  last  year  that  has  not  been  the  case.  My 
70 


626  APPENDIX. 

impression  is  that  the  closing  of  such  places  has  been  caused  by  the  efforts  of 
the  State  Constabulary. 

Q.  What  is  the  sentiment  of  the  Sons  of  Temperance  in  regard  to  this 
prohibitory  law,  as  far  as  you  know  ? 

A.  I  think  that  out  of  the  twenty-four  thousand  persons  connected  with 
the  Order  in  Massachusetts,  not  one  thousand  could  be  found  who  would 
express  an  opinion  in  favor  of  a  license  law.  In  the  city  of  Boston,  I  do  not 
know  of  but  three  persons  connected  with  the  Order  who  favor  a  license  law. 
I  do  not  think  that  the  proportion  is  so  large  outside  of  Boston.  I  do  not 
know  of  but  three  ;  there  may  be  more. 

Q.     Has  the  subject  of  a  prohibitory  law  been  before  the  Order  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  more  immediate  labors  of  the  Order,  I  suppose,  is  with  indi- 
viduals ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  it  is  not  an  organization  for  political  purposes,  but  simply  to 
save  men  from  the  evils  of  intemperance. 

Q.     Their  work,  as  a  temperance  work,  shows  itself  to  the  community  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     So  far  it  may  be  said  to  be  open  work  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  they  frequently  have  open  meetings  ? 

A.  They  do;  almost  every  Division  in  Boston,  and  some  in  the  countryr 
have  one  or  more  open  meetings  every  month. 

Q.  From  what  you  know  of  the  temperence  sentiment  of  the  Common- 
wealth, do  you  feel  that  the  hopes  of  temperance  men  would  be  elevated  or 
depressed  by  turning  now  to  the  experiment  of  a  license  law  ? 

A.  I  have  never  heard  a  man,  whom  I  considered  a  temperance  man, 
advocate  a  license  law. 

Q.    You  mean  by  a  temperance  man,  a  man  at  work  in  the  temperance 


cause 


A.  I  mean  a  man  who  sympathizes  in  the  general  movement  of  temper- 
ance, and  who  is  himself  a  total  abstainer  from  the  use  of  intoxicating 
liquors. 

Q.  Have  you  known  of  any  movement  that  might  be  called  a  temperance 
movement,  other  than  one  based  upon  total  abstinence  ? 

A.    I  never  have. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  there  is  any  propriety  in  speaking  of  men  who  are 
habitual  users  of  liquor,  and  who  merely  object  to  drunkenness,  as  men 
engaged  in  the  temperance  work  ? 

A.    I  cannot  see  any  consistency  in  such  a  statement. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  further  that  you  would  like  to  state  as  bearing  upon 
this  question  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  as  there  is. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  of  the  general  position  of  the  temperance  cause 
in  Boston  ?  Are  you  impressed  with  the  idea  that  the  use  of  liquors  is  on  the 
increase  at  present  ? 

A.  So  far  as  my  knowledge  is  concerned,  the  general  sentiment  of  Boston 
is  going  the  other  way.  I  believe  that  there  are  many  cases  where  liquor  is 


APPENDIX.  627 

more  freely  used  than  it  was  ten  years  ago,  but  it  is  by  men  who  drank  ten 
years  ago  ;  the  habit  has  grown  upon  them.  That  is  a  natural  result  of  the 
use  of  intoxicating  liquors. 

Q-     Do  you  now  see  as  many  persons  intoxicated,  as  you  did  a  few  years  ago  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  have  remarked  particulary  during  the  last  few  months,  or 
since  the  first  of  January,  that  I  have  seen  fewer  persons  intoxicated  in  Bos- 
ton, than  I  ever  did  in  any  previous  equal  length  of  time. 

Q.  What  is  your  view  in  regard  to  the  present  duty  of  the  city  govern- 
ment in  regard  to  promoting  the  temperance  reform  by  a  stricter  enforcement 
of  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  city  government  is  governed  by  the  general  sentiment 
of  the  people  of  Boston,  and  that  general  sentiment  of  Boston  is  governed  by 
the  moneyed  power  of  the  city.  I  think  that  the  sentiment  of  the  city  is  in 
favor  of  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors.  That  sentiment  has  been  brought 
about  by  the  fear  that  the  people  who  now  come  here  to  trade,  will  not  con- 
tinue to  come  here  if  they  cannot  have  just  as  much  liquor  as  they  want  to 
drink.  The  same  men  also  desire  the  licensing  of  other  crimes. 

Q.    You  refer,  I  suppose,  to  the  houses  of  ill-fame  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  have  J>een  somewhat  conversant  with  the  action  of  the  city  gov- 
ernment in  reference  to  the  sale  of  liquor.  Have  you  seen  anything  to  per- 
suade you  that  the  power  of  the  government  has  ever  been  employed  for  the 
actual  suppression  of  the  traffic,  or  that  the  traffic  cannot  be  suppressed  by 
the  authorities  ? 

A.  I  have  never  been  able  to  discover  by  any  inquiries,  nor  by  any  exam- 
ination of  the  records,  that  a  single  order  has  been  given  by  the  authorities  to 
the  police  that  would,  in  any  manner,  tend  to  stop  the  sale  of  intoxicating 
liquors. 

Q.  Were  you  a  member  of  the  police  committee  of  the  city  government 
a  year  or  two  since  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Were  you  a  member  of  the  special  committee,  to  whom  were  referred 
the  petitions  in  regard  to  the  enforcement  of  the  law  in  Boston  ? 

A.    I  was  last  year. 

Q.  Did  several  gentlemen  appear  before  that  committee,  urging  the  exe- 
cution of  the  law  V 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  remember  the  view  of  a  majority  of  that  committee  in  regard 
to  that  matter  ? 

A.  There  was  really  no  majority  of  the  committee.  The  committee  con- 
sisted of  eight  persous ;  three  being  in  favor  of  the  execution  of  the  law  and 
three  opposed  to  it,  and  two  would  not  express  an  opinion. 

Q.     The  two  other*  gentlemen  were  for  referring  the  matter  to  the  Mayor  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  and  to  the  people  of  Boston.  I  think  that  the  report  of  the 
two  gentlemen  was  as  strongly  in  favor  of  the  execution  of  the  law  as  the 
report  which  I  signed,  but  it  did  not  amount  to  anything  in  the  end. 

Q,  On  the  whole,  you  feel  that  the  government  of  Boston  is  substantially 
in  thraldom  to  the  liquor  traffic  ? 


628  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  should  not  desire  to  make  that  statement  in  those  words.  There  was 
a  statement  made  by  the  Mayor  in  his  inaugural  address  to  which  he  said  in 
substance  (though  not  in  words),  that  the  prohibitory  law  could  not  be 
enforced  in  Boston.  I  thought  at  the  time  that  I  heard  the  sentiment  uttered 
that,  if  any  gentleman  who  was  not  a  member  of  the  city  government,  or  any 
gentleman  outside  the  city  of  Boston,  had  made  such  a  statement  in  regard  to 
the  police  force  of  Boston, — that  they  could  not  execute  any  law  of  the  Com- 
monwealth,— that  such  a  gentleman-  would  have  been  treated  pretty  severely 
by  the  newspapers  of  Boston.  I  think  that  the  statement  was  an  unjust  impu- 
tation upon  the  Boston  police  force. 

Q.  During  the  years  that  you  have  resided  in  Boston,  have  you  ever  fallen 
into  the  mistake  of  supposing  that  the  city  authorities  were  engaged  in  the 
business  of  suppressing  the  liquor  traffic  ? 

A.  I  never  have.  I  have  never  yet  been  able  to  find  nor  to  learn  of 
a  single  order  ever  issued,  proposing  to  enforce  the  prohibitory  law  in  Boston. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  How  many  do  you  say  belong  to  the  Sons  of  Tem- 
perance in  this  State  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  figures,  upon  the  first  of  January,  were  twenty-four 
thousand ;  now  there  are  probably  more  than  twenty-five  thousand  members. 

Q.    Voters? 

A.    No,  sir  5  men  and  women. 

Q.    This  secret  organization  is  composed  then  of  men  and  women  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  proceedings  of  the  organization,  except  when  they  please  to  have 
a  public  meeting,  are  secret  from  the  world,  are  they  not  ? 

A.     Well,  sir,  I  do  not  know  how  far 

Q.  Are  the  societies  open  to  the  public  to  come  in  and  see  what  is  there 
going  on  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  not  unless  they  come  in  at  the  door  in  the  regular  form. 

Adjourned. 


APPENDIX.  629 

EIGHTEENTH    DAY. 

THURSDAY,  March  21, 1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  the  hearing  of  testimony  on 
behalf  of  the  Remonstrants  was  continued. 

TESTIMONY  OP   SAMUEL  W.  HODGES  (continued.') 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  gave  a  pretty  decided  opinion,  yesterday,  if  I 
understood  you  rightly,  as  to  the  state  of  feeling  throughout  the  Common- 
wealth being  in  favor  of  this  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  was  speaking  of  the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Temperance.  I  have  no 
doubt  on  the  other  point,  but  I  have  not  the  data  to  speak  of  it. 

Q.  You  confined  yourself  to  the  Order,  when  you  spoke  of  a  decided 
majority  being  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  do  not  mean  to  be  understood  so.  I  mean  to  say,  that  the 
remark  I  made  yesterday  was  to  that  effect.  I  don't  consider  that  I  was 
asked  to  make  a  statement  in  regard  to  others. 

Q.  In  regard  to  your  means  of  information  as  to  the  opinion  of  that 
organization,  do  you  derive  it  from  personal  knowledge  or  from  written 
information  ? 

A.  I  at  the  present  time  occupy  the  position  of  Secretary  of  that  Order, 
both  of  the  State  and  National  organizations,  and  have  the  written  testimony 
to  that  effect. 

Q.  I  perceive  that  among  the  petitions  upon  this  subject,  there  are  petitions 
from  several  Orders,  of  different  names.  Are  those  Orders  extensively 
established  throughout  the  Commonwealth  ? 

A.  The  Divisions  of  the  Sons  of  Temperance  are  extensively  circulated 
throughout  the  Commonwealth.  There  are  125  Divisions  in  the  State.  I 
say  125 ;  there  may  be  126. 

Q.  Are  these  Divisions  in  so  many  different  towns,  or  are  there  several  in 
the  same  town  ? 

A.  .  In  the  city  of  Boston,  there  are  14  or  15,  and  in  one  or  two  other 
places,  there  are  more  than  one.  But  with  a  very  few  exceptions,  there  is 
simply  one  in  a  town.  In  some  of  the  larger  cities,  there  are  two  or  three. 

Q.  How  extensively  are  the  other  Orders,  besides  the  Sons  of  Temperance, 
established  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  have  no  personal  information,  and  I  have  not  read  their 
reports,  and  am  not  able  to  speak  with  the  same  knowledge ;  but  my  general 
impression  is,  that  in  towns  where  we  have  no  Sons  of  Temperance,  there  are 
organizations  of  other  Orders,  and  that  nearly  every  town  in  the  Common- 
wealth has  something  of  this  kind.  I  think  there  are  very  few  towns  of  moro 
than  a  thousand  inhabitants  that  have  not  something  of  this  kind. 

Q.     And  these  organizations  are  composed,  ir  part,  of  females  ? 


630  APPENDIX. 

A.  It  is  optional  with  each  organization,  as  I  understand,  to  say  whether 
they  will  admit  females  or  not.  I  think,  as  a  rule,  they  do. 

Q.  You  say  they  are  established  in  every  town  in  the  Commonwealth :  I 
wish  to  ask  if  they  are  all  secret,  in  the  same  sense  and  as  far  as  you  under- 
stand the  Order  of  the  Sons  of  Temperance  to  be  secret  ? 

A.  Every  Division  of  the  Sons  of  Temperance  is  under  the  same  constitu- 
tion, and  governed  by  the  same  laws. 

Q.     Do  you  understand  that  the^e  other  organizations  are  secret  societies  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  suppose  they  are.  I  am  not  a  member  of  but  one  other 
of  the  organieations  to  which  J  refer — the  Good  Templars— but  I  presume 
their  organization  is  similar  to  that  of  the  Sons  of  Temperance,  and  their 
objects  the  same. 

Q.  Are  the  same  individuals  frequently  members  of  different  organizations 
— the  Sons  of  Temperance,  Good  Templars,  etc.  ? 

A.  Very  likely  they  are;  but  I  am  not  able  to  speak  from  personal 
knowledge. 

Q.  How  extensively  in  Boston,  where  you  do  know,  are  the  members  of 
one  members  of  others  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  am  not  prepared  to  answer  who  are  members  of  other 
organizations,  because  I  am  not  a  member  myself;  but,  as  far  as  I  know,  the 
proportion  is  rather  small  among  my  immediate  acquaintance,  although  I 
never  took  pains  to  inquire.  I  should  not  wish  to  give  a  direct  answer, 
whether  they  are  or  are  not. 

Q.  You  said  that  the  temperance  people — those  whom  you  call  temperance 
people — generally  were  in  favor  of  the  law.  What  do  you  mean  by  that 
term  ? 

A.  I  answered  that  yesterday.  I  mean  a  person  who  gives  his  influence 
and  labor  on  the  side  of  the  temperance  movement,  with  temperance  men, 
and  who  is  himself  personally  a  total  abstinence  man.  That  is  what  I 
consider  a  temperance  man — nothing  short  of  it. 

Q.  Then,  if  a  man  don't  give  his  influence  and  co-operation  with  temper- 
ance men,  although  he  is  a  total  abstinence  man,  you  would  not,  under  your 
definition,  call  him  a  temperance  man  ? 

A»  If  he  gives  his  influence  on  the  side  of  the  opposition,  I  should  not 
consider  him  a  temperance  man.  A  Man  might  be  only  negative  in  his  influ- 
ence, and  be«i  total  abstinence  man,  (which  is  the  disposition  of  some  people.) 
I  might  call  that  man  a  temperance  man. 

Q.     You  "  might."    Would  you  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  think  I  might.  If  his  influence  was  only  negative,  and  he 
was  a  total  abstinence  man,  I  should  call  him  a  temperance  man. 

Q.    You  would  be  more  clear  if  he  took  part  in  the  movement  ? 

A.     Of  course  I  should. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  taking  part  ?  Do  you  want  him  to  join  these 
secret  societies  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  don't  ask  him  to  do  that.  I  might  illustrate  it  in  this  way. 
If  I  should  know  a  man  who  attended  church  meetings,  and  pretended  to  be 
a  church-member,  but  whose  private  practice  was  in  favor  of  gambling  or  any 


APPEi\TDIX.  631 

other  species  of  licentiousness,  I  should  not  call  him  a  Christian,  although  he 
might  talk  on  that  side,  and  might  be  nominally  connected  with  the  church: 

Q.  I  understood  you  to  say,  that  generally  there  is  no  distinction  of  sex  in 
regard  to  membership  of  these  societies  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  It  is  optional  with  the  Sons  of  Temperance.  I  don't  know, I 
only  presume,  in  regard  to  the  others. 

Q.    Is  there  any  class  in  the  community  who  are  not  admitted  ? ' 

A.     Persons  under  fourteen  years  of  age  are  not  admitted. 
Q.     Is  there  any  other  distinction  ? 

A.     The  distinction  of  moral  character,  sir. 

Q.     Any  other  ? 

A .  I  will  read  the  provision  in  the  constitution  in  regard  to  that  matter ; 
it  is  but  five  lines :  "  Persons  fourteen  years  of  age  and  upwards,  pos- 
sessing a  character  .for  integrity,  and  who  have  not  been  rejected  by  or 
expelled  from  any  other  Division  within  six  months,  shall  be  eligible  to 
membership." 

Q.  What  proportion  of  the  members,  so  far  as  you  are  acquainted,  are 
females,  or  young  people  under  twenty-one  years  of  age  ? 

A.     The  proportion  of  females  is  about  twelve  to  ten. 

Q.     More  females  than  males  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  is  it  with  regard  to  those  under  twenty-one  years  of  age  ? 

A.  I  have  no  means  of  knowing.  I  should  think  that  40  percent.,  possi- 
bly, are  males  under  twenty-one ;  perhaps  10  per  cent,  under  eighteen. 

Q.  You  would  not  embrace,  then,  a  great  number  of  voters  in  your 
twenty-four  thousand  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  So  that,  when  you  speak  of  the  twenty-four  thousand  members  of  that 
Order,  their  opinion  does  not  indicate  very  distinctly  what  the  opinion  of  the 
people  of  the  State  is  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  as  they  are  really  representative  men  in  the  towns  in  which 
they  live. 

Q.  That  may  be  or  may  not ;  but,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  you  have  no  defi- 
nite information  what  the  opinion  of  the  people  is,  further  than  what  is  derived 
from  your  knowledge  of  the  membership  of  this  institution  ? 

A.  No  more  than  I  can  judge  of  the  strength  of  the  Christian  religion  by 
taking  simply  the  church-members. 

Q.  You  speak  of  being  somewhat  conversant  with  this  city.  How  long 
Lave  you  been  a  resident  of  Boston  ? 

A.  Six  years.  For  ten  years  previous  to  that  I  was  doing  business  in 
Boston,  and  here  almost  every  day. 

Q.    In  your  opinion,  is  there  a  great  deal  of  intemperance  in  Boston  ? 

A.     I  should  think  there  was,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  think  it  has  increased  within  the  last  ten  years  ? 

A.  I  stated  yesterday  that  I  thought  it  had  decreased  very  sensibly  within 
the  last  four  or  five  years. 

Q.  What  particular  facts  or  means  of  information  have  you  upon  which  to 
base  that  opinion  ? 


632  APPENDIX. 

A.  First,  I  will  speak  of  the  locality  in  which  I  live.  When  I  came  to 
Boston,  there  were  in  the  immediate  vicinity  of  my  hotise  six  or  seven  places 
where  intoxicating  drinks  were  sold.  Intending  to  locate  there,  I  had  an 
interest  in  having  the  neighborhood  as  clear  as  possible.  I  used  my  influence 
individually,  and  I  do  not  know,  in  the  vicinity  where  those  shops  were 
located,  a  Dingle  place  where  intoxicating  drinks  are  sold  at  the  present  time. 
Q.  Have  you  any  other  facts  showing  the  decrease,  except  the  diminution 
of  the  places  where  liquors  are  so\d,  within  your  personal  observation  ? 

A.  Passing  up  and  down  Washington  Street  Sundays,  I  found  a  large 
number  of  places  open  when  I  first  came  to  town.  I  have  passed  up  that 
street  within  the  last  four  weeks,  on  the  Sabbath,  and  I  did  not  discover  one 
place  open. 

Q.  Have  you  made  any  observation  as  to  whether  there  is  a  greater  or  less 
number  of  drunkards  now  than  formerly  ? 

A .    i  do  not  see  anything  near  the  number  that  I  used  to  see  in  the  streets. 

Q-  Still,  if  the  daily  arrests  increase,  should  you  not  infer  from  that  that 
drunkenness  and  intemperance  had  increased  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  Previous  to  1864  it  was  apparently  for  the  interest  of  the 
Chief  of  Police  to  show  that  the  police  of  Boston  were  doing  all  they  could 
to  suppress  intemperance,  and  consequently  the  number  of  arrests  was 
growing  smaller.  Since  the  establishment  of  the  State  Constabulary,  it  has 
apparently  been  for  the  interest — that  is,  it  is  understood  to  be  for  the  interest 
-—of  the  Chief  of  Police  to  report  an  increase  of  drunkenness,  if  possible,  and 
he  has  so  done. 

Q.  Well,  what  means  of  information  have  you,  by  which  you  arrive  at  that 
conclusion  ? 

A.    Direct  personal  observation. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  your  suspicion  of  the  dishonesty  of  the  Chief 
of  Police  and  Deputy-Chief  is  sufficient  to  outweigh  the  positive  statements 
made  by  them  under  oath  ? 

A.  I  do  not  accuse  them  of  dishonesty,  in  any  shape  whatever.  They 
follow  instructions. 

Q.  Are  people  of  color  anywhere  members  of  these  institutions  to  which 
you  have  referred  ? 

A.  They  are  of  the  Sons  of  Temperance,  and  I  presume  of  the  others, 
though  I  do  not  know. 

Q.     Are  they  of  the  Temple  of  Honor  ? 

A.  I  think  they  have  the  word  "  white  "  in  their  constitution.  I  am  very 
positive  of  it.  I  know  the  organization,  but  I  am  not  a  member  of  it. 

Q.  (Reading  from  the  Constitution  of  the  Temple  of  Honor.)  "  All  white 
persons  of  good  moral  character  ?  " 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  think  the  word  "white"  is  in  their  constitution.  It  is  not 
in  ours,  and  I  think  it  is  not  in  the  Good  Templars. 

Q.     Have  you  any  colored  peoole  connected  with  your  Order  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  many  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell  the  number ;  they  are  not  returned  separately.  We  count 
them  as  men  and  women.  We  make  no  distinction  in  that  respect. 


APPENDIX.  633 

Q.  Have  you  any  means  of  knowing  how  many  there  are,  or  whether  there 
are  any  considerable  number  ? 

A.  I  could  ascertain  by  writing  to  the  different  Divisions,  and  asking  them 
to  give  rne  the  number.  We  have  one  Division  in  Boston  composed  entirely, 
I  believe,  of  colored  people.  There  may  be  some  white  persons  among  them. 

Q.     Docs  not  that  embrace  all  the  colored  people  who  belong  to  the  Order  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  it  may  in  Boston,  because  they  naturally  go  with  their  own 
people. 

Q.  Are  there  any  colored  people  in.  Boston  belonging  to  your  own 
Division  ? 

A.     Not  to  the  one  to  which  I  belong.     I  do  not  know  about  the  others. 

Q.  Do  you  know  a  single  white  Division  in  Boston  that  has  colored  people 
belonging  to  it  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  do  not. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  You  have  been  connected  with  the  city  government 
one  yanr  previous  to  the  present  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  the  government  of  the  city  has  paid  any  bills 
for  refreshments  at  any  time,  which  were  understood  to  include  or  which  were 
known  to  include  liquors  ? 

A.  Not  since  my  connection  with  the  government;  but  I  have  been  told 
that  it  has  been  done  previous  to  that  time.  I  cannot  speak  from  positive 
knowledge,  except  during  my  own  connection.  The  city  government  passed 
a  resolution  that  no  portion  of  any  money  should  be  expended  for  intoxicating 
liquors  to  be  used  as  a  beverage ;  and  I  believe  that  was  directly  and  honestly 
carried  out  during  the  year  1866,  and  I  think  it  will  be  during  1867. 

Q.     Are  you  aware  of  its  having  been  done  previously  ? 

A.  I  have  never  been  present,  and  consequently  cannot  say  as  to  that.  I 
have  no  doubt  it  has  been. 

Q.  Have  you  had  any  testimony  from  any  persons  concerned  in  the 
matter  ? 

A.  I  have  had  individuals  tell  me  so;  I  do  not  vouch  for  it.  I  have  no 
doubt  about  it  in  my  own  mind. 

Q.  Were  you  conversant  with  the  fact  of  the  meeting  of  an  association  of 
physicians  in  this  city,  a  year  or  two  since,  who  occupied  this  hall  ? 

A.  I  was  conversant  with  the  fact  of  such  an  association  being  in  the  city, 
and  a  portion  of  the  time  in  charge  of  the  city  government. 

Q.    Was  it  during  the  last  year  ? 

A .  No,  sir.  I  think  it  was  the  year  previous  to  my  connection  with  the 
city  government. 

Q.  And  you  cannot  testify,  personally,  with  regard  to  anything  of  that 
kind? 

A.    I  cannot  personally  testify  with  regard  to  anything  of  that  kind. 

TESTIMONY  OF  CALVIN  A.  RICHARDS. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)    You  are  among  the  petitioners  for  a  license  law  ? 
A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Are  you  a  dealer  in  liquors  in  Boston  ? 
80 


634  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  have  been,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  at  present  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  to  the  Committee  what  considerations 
and  what  views  influenced  you  in  asking  for  a  license  law  ?  What  are  your 
reasons  ? 

A.  In  brief,  I  should  say  that  they  were  to  regulate  and  protect  me  in  my 
business.  I  ask  for  a  law  of  regulation,  that  I  may  have  some  control  over 
niy  business  myself,  and  that  I  may  conduct  it  in  a  respectable  and  lawful 
manner. 

Q.  It  was  not  any  part  of  your  purpose  that  a  law  should  be  enacted  to 
restrict  your  business  ? 

A.  I  should  be  perfectly  willing  to  come  under  any  restrictions  that  would 
enable  me  to  carry  on  my  business  in  a  respectable  and  lawful  manner. 

Q.     And  permit  the  sale  itself? 

A.     That  is  the  natural  wish  of  anybody  Jn  business,  I  believe. 

Q.  Before  the  present  law  was  enforced,  did  you  petition  for  a  license 
law  ?  Previous  to  two  or  three  years  ago,  at  the  periods  when  there  was  any 
movement  in  the  State  for  a  license  law,  were  you  a  petitioner  for  a  license 
law? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  early  ? 

.1.     I  have  always  signed  every  petition  that  was  brought  to  me. 

Q.  Your  opinion  is,  that  if  the  State  would  throw  its  arms  about  the  traf- 
fic, it  would  tend  to  make  it  more  respectable,  and  aid  the  business  ? 

A.  I  hardly  know  what  you  mean  by  aiding  the  business,  unless  it  is  upon 
the  ground  upon  which  you  state.  To  aid  it,  in  my  view,  is  to  raise  it  and 
put  it  upon  a  respectable  foundation,  so  that  everybody  should  be  willing  to 
engage  in  it. 

Q.     What  makes  it  low  ? 

A.     That  there  is  no  restraint  upon  it. 

Q.    In  what  respect  ? 

A.  Because  it  is  sold  openly,  and  has  been,  by  what  wo  are  in  the 
habit  of  calling  irresponsible  people,  who  have  no  regard  for  any  portion  of 
their  character  in  any  way,  and  whose  only  desire  is  to  make  money  out  of  it 
You  ask  what  would  make  it  respectable.  I  should  say,  take  it  away  from 
such  people  as  that,  and  put  it  into  the  hands  of  people  who  would  uphold  a 
law  that  would  sustain  them  in  it. 

Q.  But  in  the  dry  goods  trade  nobody  asks  restrictions  for  the  sale  of  cot- 
ton cloth.  What  is  there  in  the  nature  of  your  business  that  requires  regu- 
lating more  than  the  dry  goods  business,  in  your  judgment  ? 

A.  Of  course  it  is  well  know  that  a  man  can  make  a  different  use  of  a 
stimulant  than  he  can  of  cotton. 

Q.  Why  not  make  the  trade  entirely  open,  and  put  restraint  upon  the 
drinker  who  makes  a  bad  use  of  the  liquor  ? 

A.    We  do  not  believe,  sir,  that  it  is  not  so  now. 

Q.     Why  not  put  it  in  that  form  ? 


APPENDIX.  635 

A.  The  trade  have  no  particular  objection  to  having  it  entirely  open,  but 
the  fact  that  men  engage  in  it,  and  are  engaged  in  it,  who  make  it  derogatory 
somewhat. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  drunkenness  and  other  social  evils,  follow 
from  the  business  as  conducted  at  the  hands  of  some  men,  and  not  as  con- 
ducted at  the  hands  of  other  men  ? 

A.  I  believe,  sir,  that  drunkenness  does  not  follow  from  the  hands  of  any 
man  who  sells  liquor.  I  believe  it  follows  from  the  feeling  and  the  desire  on 
the  part  of  the  drinker  to  get  drunk. 

Q.  Who  drinks  to  get  drunk,  or  who  misjudges  the  amount  that  he  can 
carry  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  there  is  a  certain  state,  when  a  man  who  has  been  drinking 
will  desire  to  get  drunk. 

Q.     Why  ask  any  restriction  upon  the  traffic  ? 

A.  I  said  that  the  desire  of  the  petitioners,  so  far  as  I  know  those  who 
have  petitioned,  is  for  a  law  of  regulation  in  the  business.  We  do  not  believe 
in  a  law  of  prohibition,  because  we  do  not  believe  there  can  be  any  restraint 
put  upon  the  business  thereby. 

Q.  Would  you  have  any  objection,  if  the  State  should  prefer  to  throw  open 
the  traffic  entirely,  and  direct  its  efforts  to  suppress  the  improper  use  of 
liquors,  by  the  application  of  the  law  to  drunkenness  ? 

A.    I  think  that  would  be  a  matter  of  experiment  entirely. 

Q.  As  a  trafficker,  you  would  have  no  objection  to  that  state  of  things, 
would  you  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Precisely  what  ? 

A.  Because  I  think  there  are  certainly  persons  who  should  not  be  allowed 
to  sell. 

Q.  Does  it  make  any  difference  who  sells  brandy,  as  to  what  effect  it  will 
produce  ? 

A.    It  is  according  to  the  kind  of  brandy  they  sell. 

Q.    It  depends  much  upon  that,  does  it  ? 

A.  My  opinion  would  be,  that  if  a  person  was  going  to  buy  of  the  State 
Agent,  it  would. 

Q.    Does  the  State  Agent  purchase  of  you  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  know  the  quality  of  the  liquors  kept  by  the  State  Agency  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    How  ? 

A.    By  tasting. 

Q.     Can  you  distinguish  good  liquor  from  bad  by  the  taste  ? 

A.  I  have  been  in  the  business  twenty-five  years.  I  know  by  the  taste,  if 
I  know  anything  that  I  taste. 

Q.    How  do  you  know  that  the  liquor  you  tasted  came  from  the  agency  ? 

A.    Because  the  gentleman  who  brought  it  to  me  so  stated. 

Q.     That  is  hearsay  testimony. 

A.     There  is  a  good  deal  of  that  which  is  true. 

Q.    Do  you  know  that  the  liquors  came  from  the  State  Agency  ? 


636  APPENDIX. 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  just  as  well  as  ^  can  know  anything. 

Q.     Do  you  positively  know  that  they  came  from  the  agency  ? 

A .    I  know  in  the  way  and  manner  which  I  obtained  it,  and  that  only. 

Q.  Speaking  of  the  effects  of  liquor  at  the  hands  of  irresponsible  persons, 
have  you  never  seen  the  effects  of  liquor  sold  in  first-class  houses  ? 

Q.  (By  Mr.  RICHARDS.)  Will  you  please  to  describe  what  you  mean  by 
the  effects  ? 

A.  Greater  or  less  inebriety  and  disorder.  Have  you  never  known  of  a 
large  degree  of  inebriety  and  even  disorder  in  first-class  houses  ? 

Q.     (By  Mr.  RICHARDS.)     Do  you  mean  hotels  ? 

A-    I  raise  the  question  generally  ;  you  may  include,  of  course,  hotels. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MORSE.)     Public  or  private  ? 

A.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)    Either  or  both. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  RICHARDS.)  Have  I  not  seen  liquor  as  the  reason  for  disor- 
ders on  the  premises  where  it  is  sold  ? 

A.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  That  is  a  little  more  specific  than  my  question  ;  but 
you  may  answer  that. 

A.     (By  Mr.  RICHARDS.)     I  cannot  say  that  I  have. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  the  effects  of  liquor  in  first-class  houses  have  been 
inebriety  and  disorder  ? 

A.  I  have  often  heard — not  often  heard,  but  I  have  read  in  the  papers-r-of 
disturbances  in  places  where  liquor  is  sold. 

Q.    Is  that  the  most  intimate  knowledge  you  have  ? 

A.  I  cannot  know,  according  to  your  rule,  when  I  say  that  I  have  not  seen 
it  myself. 

Q.     Thqn  you  have  never  seen  inebriety  in  these  places  ? 

A.     Have  I  not  just  said  that,  sir  ? 

Q.  You  said  you  had  never  seen  the  liquor  drank.  I  ask  you  a  little 
broader  question.  Have  you  never  seen  inebriety  in  first-class  houses  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  you  use  the  term  inebriety  as  merely  a  polite  phrase  for 
drunkenness.  I  never  have  seen  at  "  Parker's,"  or  the  "  Tremont,"  or  the 
"  Revere,"  or  any  of  our  first-class  hotels,  any  drunkenness.  I  am  not  con- 
stantly at  these  places,  however. 

Q.  Have  you  never  seen  gentlemen  going  out  of  these  places  partially 
inebriated. 

A.  It  is  pretty  difficult  to  answer  that.  I  have  seen  persons  coming  out  of 
the  hotels  in  slippery  weather,  and  have  seen  them  fall  down.  I  could  not 
tell  whether  they  were  inebriated  or  not. 

Q.  In  the  list  of  establishments  embraced  in  the  list  here,  have  you  never 
known  circumstances  where  inebriety  had  been  occasioned  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  what  the  whole  breadth  of  this  license  law  may  be. 

Q.  I  do  not  know  all  the  details ;  but  in  general  I  suppose  you  know  that 
the  apothecaries,  and  the  grocers,  and  the  like,  are  contemplated  as  proper  to 
be  licensed.  And  my  question  is,  Are  you  not  aware  that,  in  the  range 
of  these,  inebriety  frequently  arises  from  the  use  of  liquors  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  can  say  that.  I  think  that  where  it  is  sold  free 
and  openly,  as  it  is,  and  has  been,  that  no  honest  man  can  stand  up  and  say 
that  a  man  does  not  enter  his  establishment  who  is  inebriated  ;  at  the  same 


APPENDIX.  637 

time  I  would  not  admit  that  the  man  kept  a  bad  house,  because  such  a  person 
came  there,  any  more  than  I  would  if  he  should  go  into  your  church. 

Q.  Have  you  a  doubt  that  men  buy  and  drink  liquors  and  become  inebri- 
ated in  first-class  houses  in  Boston  ?  Are  you  not  aware  that  these  things  do 
occur  ?  .  And  that  the  inebriety  is  from  liquor  purchased  and  drank  in  these 
houses  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  That  is  a  very  sweeping  denunciation.  If  you  ask  me  as  to 
all  these  places,  I  should  say  that  I  believe,  sir,  as  we  all  know,  that  the  use 
of  intoxicating  liquors  may  make  a  man  inebriated  in  his  own  house  or  any- 
where else. 

Q.  Then  the  restriction  you  ask  is  not  a  restriction  that  will  prevent 
inebriety  in  these  houses  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  how  you  can  prevent  a  man  from  inebriety  unless  you 
have  a  higher  power  than  any  one  of  us  have. 

Q.     Then  you  do  not  contemplate  a  system  that  shall  prevent  drunkenness  ? 

A.    I  think  that  we  can  have  a  law  which  will  restrict  it. 

Q.  Do  you  believe,  as  a  liquor-seller,  that  any  license  law  that  can  be 
enacted  will  limit  or  reduce  the  amount  of  liquor  business  in  Boston,  not  as 
to  the  number  of  places,  but  in  its  aggregate  ? 

Q.    (By  Mr.  RICHARDS.)     As  to  the  quantity  sold  ? 

A.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Yes,  sir. 

A.    I  do. 

Q.     How  in  the  quality  ? 

A.  In  the  first  place,  I  believe  that  in  its  present  condition  it  is  now  drank 
in  a  hypocritical  and  deceitful  manner.  I  believe  that  the  traffic  has  been 
driven  out  of  the  daylight,  and  out  of  the  sight  of  men  into  dark  and  danger- 
ous and  lonesome  places,  where  men  have  no  respect  for  themselves  while 
there,  and  have  no  control  over  themselves.  I  believe  there  is  a  spark  of 
something  in  every  man  that  when  he  has  got  to  stand  up  daily  and  hourly  or 
often  enough  to  get  inebriated  at  a  public  bar,  he  is  ashamed  if  he  go  too  far ; 
but  if  he  is  driven  to  obtain  a  bottle  or  a  gallon  in  a  surreptitious  manner 
and  carry  it  to  his  home,  that  then  and  there  it  will  create  an  influence  that 
he  will  not  restrict  himself. 

Q.  Then  you  think  that  the  carrying  of  liquor  to  a  person's  home  has 
a  bad  effect  ? 

A.    I  think  it  has  with  some. 

Q.  Then  would  you  think  the  plan  of  a  license  law  unfavorable  if  it 
proposes  to  shut  up  all  open  places  ? 

A>  I  believe  that  a  man  who  can  make  a  proper  use  of  liquor  will  make 
use  of  it  as  well  in  one  place  as  another.  I  believe  there  are  some  who 
cannot  do  that,  who  should  be  restrained. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  on  the  whole  that  any  man's  business  is  promoted  when 
he  is  compelled  to  make  it  secret  and  clandestine. 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Then  how  do  you  say  that  the  license  law  would  restrain  the  amount 
of  sale  ? 

A.    I  said  the  amount  of  use,  or  the  amount  of  drinking. 

Q.    I  put  the  two  things  together. 


638  APPENDIX. 

A.     Hardly  in  the  instances  that  you  suggest. 

Q.     Why  not  ? 

A.  Because,  if  a  man  came  to  me  to  purchase  liquor,  who  I  knew  would 
not  make  a  proper  use  of  it,  I  should  not  sell  it  to  him.  And  although  it  maj 
seem  rather  strange  to  you,  yet  I  can  say  that  I  never  sold  any  liquor-  to  anj 
man  that  I  thought  would  make  a  bad  use  of  it.  But  if  I  sell  a  barrel  to  a 
person,  and  he  should  sell  out  of  it  to  irresponsible  persons  who  peddle  it  ou< 
to  others,  I  believe  there  is  where" restraint  might  step  in. 

Q.     Has  it  really  been  so  hemmed  in  that  it  is  necessary  to  peddle  it  out  ? 

A .  It  is  not  so  circumscribed ;  *but  certain  persons  take  that  way  of  selling 
it. 

Q.  You  testified  just  now  that  you  believed  that  a  license  law  could  be 
made  so  as  to  restrict  the  amount  that  should  be  sold  and  used.  I  understand 
you  now  to  say  that  a  restriction  driving  into  it  secret,  tends  to  promote  its  sale. 

A.     You  ally  these  questions  together. 

Q.     They  belong  together. 

A.  I  said  that  the  amount  of  liquor  which  would  be  sold,  under  a  law  oi 
regulation,  I  think  would  be  smaller  than  the  amount  now  sold. 

Q.  Precisely  what  do  you  mean  by  a  law  of  regulation  ?  Do  you  mean 
anything  more  than  a  law  protecting  men  in  selling  liquors  as  a  beverage  ? 

A .  I  mean  that  any  evil  (as  you  please  to  call  it)  can  be  under  certain 
restraints.  After  you  have  acknowledged  that  it  does  exist  and  must  exist,  it 
can  be  put  under  certain  restraints  by  means  of  laws  of  regulation,  while  a 
law  of  pure  prohibition  may  not  restrict  the  effect. 

Q-     Do  you  mean  the  amount  sold  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you,  as  a  business  man,  here  asking  for  a  license  law  to  restrict 
your  business  in  amount  ? 

Q.     By  Mr.  RICHARDS.)     My  own  individual  business  ? 

A.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Yes  sir. 

A.     I  could  not  say  that. 

Q.  You  speak  of  shameful  occurrences  in  various  places.  Do  you  suppose 
that  the  drinking  of  liquors  as  a  beverage  is,  or  by  any  legislation  under 
heaven  can  be  made,  as  respectable  a  business  as  selling  meat  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     As  a  beverage  ? 

A.    As  a  beverage. 

Q.     Do  you  believe  that  the  use  of  liquors  is  good  for  a  man  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q    Do  you  rest  on  your  own  experience  and  observation  ? 

Q.  (By  Mr.  RICHARDS.)  Do  you  mean  whether  I  have  drank  it  myself 
or  not? 

A.     (By  Mr.  MIXER.)     Yes,  sir. 

A.  In  the  first  place  I  do  not  like  your  statement,  and  your  jumping  from 
one  question  to  another,  and  passing  very  lightly  over  it. 

Q.     In  the  present  state  of  things 

A.  In  any  state  of  things,  I  believe  that  any  man  with  an  honest  con- 
science ,(and  I  profess  to  have  one),  sir,  can  do  a  liquor  business  and  do  it  in 


APPENDIX.  639 

an  honorable  manner.  If  you  will  visit  my  store,  I  will  show  you  names  of 
men  from  almost  all  classes  of  society,  from  the  judge,  who  to-day  would  sen- 
tence me,  down  to  the  juror  in  the  box.  These  men  come  into  my  store, 
judges,  physicians,  and  (I  beg  your  pardon  for  saying  it,)  ministers 

Mr.  MINER.  You  need  not  beg  my  pardon  for  saying  it,  for  I  do  not  go 
there. 

Mr.  RICHARDS.  And  (I  beg  your  pardon  [to  Mr.  Child]  for  saying  it) 
lawyers ;  and  they  buy  of  me  the  wines  which  I  bring  from  foreign  countries. 
I  find  that  it  takes  some  money  to  buy  them,  and  that  it  takes  some  money  to 
bring  them  here,  and  I  find  that  this  class  of  people  come  to  me  to  buy  my 
goods,  and  that  physicians  send  to  me  for  articles  for  their  use 

Q.     Do  you  keep  an  apothecary  shop  ? 

A.  Ko,  sir;  although,  in  a  certain  sense  of  the  term,  we  sell  a  good  deal 
of  medicine. 

Q.  Are  you  able  to  go  one  step  further,  and  to  say  that  your  business  is 
cognate  to  that  of  selling  meat  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  anything  that  the  public  require. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  utility  of  a  business  depends  upon  whether  the  public 
require  the  article  ? 

A.    If  they  will  have  it,  and  always  have  had  it  since  the  world  began. 

Q.     Would  you  apply  it  to  gaming  ? 

A.     If  you  regard  it  as  a  business,  I  would  have  it. 

Q.  Would  you  recommend  a  friend,  a  man  in  health,  a  young  man,  to 
patronize  such  establishments  in  first  class-houses,  where  parties  drink  liquors 
daily  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  hardly  sec  what  bearing  that  question  can  have.  If  a 
young  man  should  come  to  me  to  ask  whether  he  had  better  commence  that 
kind  of  life  or  that  business,  I  should  say  no. 

Q.     Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  that  once  more  ? 

A.  I  said,  sir,  that  if  a  young  man  (my  brother,  I  think  you  said,  or  friend), 
should  come  to  me  and  ask  my  advice  whether  he  had  better  begin  (speaking 
of  him  as  an  novice),  I  should  say  no.  If  he  came  to*  me  and  asked  me  if 
he  had  better  take  it  as  a  medicine,  I  should  say,  that  he  could  do  so  if  he 
thought  best. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  liquors  of  the  State  Agency  being  bad,  and  that  you 
knew  of  whom  the  agent  purchased  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Would  you  feel  at  liberty  to  tell  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    But  you  point  out  the  agency  without  scruple  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Why  will  you  not  state  where  the  agent  buys  ? 

A .    I  believe  that  is  a  matter  in  which  I  have  no  concern. 

Q.    Is  the  man  of  whom  he  buys  a  respectable  dealer  ? 

A .    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Is  he  not  as  respectable  as  any  dealer  in  the  city  ? 


640  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  do  not  know  of  whom  he  buys  all  he  sells.  I  know  of  whom  he  buys 
some,  or  who  I  have  understood  has  supplied  him ;  that  is,  as  you  have 
instructed  me  to  know. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  Did  I  understand  you  to  say  that  you  had  been  in 
business  a  good  many  years  in  Boston  ? 

A.    I  have. 

Q.  And  have  you  observed  the  course  of  trade  in  your  particular  class  of 
business  ? 

A .    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  ask  your  opinion  in  regard  to  the  change,  if  there  has 
been  any,  in  the  quality  of  liquors  that  have  been  sold,  for  the  last  few  years, 
in  Boston  ? 

A.     1  think  the  quality,  sir,  has  deteriorated  very  materially. 

Q.  I  do  not  refer  to  your  own  business,  of  course,  but  to  the  general 
business  of  Boston.  What  explanation  do  you  give  for  that  ? 

A.  In  the  first  place,  I  should  say,  that  the  great  increase  in  prices,  occa- 
sioned by  the  high  tariff  and  large  internal  revenue  taxes,  has  produced 
a  modification  in  its  production  which  has  deteriorated  its  quality.  Some  five 
or  eight  years  ago,  a  person  could  buy  a  gallon  of  very  decent  whiskey  for 
fifty  cents;  now  that  same  article  ought  to  cost  him  a  dollar  and  a  half. 
And  there  have  all  kinds  of  modifications  of  that  article  been  introduced  and 
sold. 

Q.  What  is  the  effect  of  the  surreptitious  sale  upon  the  quality  of  the 
article  sold  ? 

A.  I  think  the  class  of  people  to  whom  I  referred  then,  care  nothing  for 
the  quality  at  all.  They  want  that  kind  of  liquor  which  will  only  make  the 
"  drunk  "  come.  It  makes  but  little  difference,  so  long  as  there  is  an  alcoholic 
stimulant,  what  the  different  component  parts  are.  They  know  they  are  selling 
unlawfully,  and  that  they  have  the  House  of  Correction  hanging  over  them ; 
and  they  think  that  as  long  as  they  cannot  have  a  more  open  field,  they  will 
have  a  larger  chance  of  profit  from  what  they  do  sell.  It  is  in  the  same  way, 
if  I  may  illustrate,  as-  the  illicit  distillation  is  carried  on.  Therefore,  these 
men  engage  in  it ;  and  the  Lord  only  knows  what  the  quality  of  the  liquor  is 
which  they  sell. 

Q,  Suppose  that  this  liquor  law  were  generally  enforced  in  Boston,  so  that 
only  the  hotels  and  grocers  and  the  wholesale  dealers,  and  those  persons  con- 
sidered respectable,  should  sell  liquor,  would  the  actual  sale  of  liquor  cease  ? 
And  how  would  it  be  as  to  the  change  in  the  amount  and  the  quality  of  what 
was  sold  ? 

A.  Regarding  the  amount  that  might  be  sold,  of  course  it  is  regulated,  as 
my  friend  the  Doctor  says,  by  the^amount  drank.  I  do  not  believe  restricting 
the  sale  in  any  way  affects,  to  any  very  great  amount,  the  use  among  men 
who  will  have  it  at  any  rate.  In  our  neighborhood  there  is  nothing  easier 
(and  it  is  done  every  day)  than  for  some  man  to  send  to  New  York  and  obtain 
all  he  wants.  My  experience  has  been,  all  my  life,  that  if  a  man  wanted  it 
he  would  have  it.  There  seemed  to  be  something  that  would  lead  him  to 
make  any  sacrifice,  and  he  would  have  it  upon  any  consideration  whatever  • 
and  I  believe  that  if  you  close  to-day  the  places  you  have  designated,  the 


APPENDIX.  641 

business  would  still  find  its  way,  and  that  men  would  dare,  assuming  all  the 
chances  of  profit,  to  take  up  the  business,  and  run  all  the  risks  of  its  pains 
and  penalties,  and  carry  it  on  at  any  rate.  I  do  not  believe  it  among  the 
things  possible  to  entirely  restrain  its  sale. 

Q.  What  change,  if  any,  do  you  think  there  would  be  in  its  quality  ?• 
•  A.  I  believe  that,  if  there  is  a  class  of  »en  to-day  who  are  uneasy  regard- 
ing this  inquiry,  it  is  among  certain  portions  of  the  liquor-dealers  who  know 
that  they  cannot  obtain  a  license.  I  believe  that  they  are  aware  that  by  no 
means  could  they  obtain  a  license.  A  license  system,  as  has  been  remarked, 
contemplates  putting  the  sale  into  the  hands  of  respectable  men  in  trade,  and 
these  men  are  determined  to  conduct  the  business  upon  as  high  a  platform  as 
it  is  possible  to  put  it.  During  some  ten  years  it  was  always  the  custom  of 
first-class  dealers  not  to  sell  to  anybody  who  had  not  a  license,  because  they 
were  liable  to  be  broken  up.  Therefore,  it  becomes  a  matter  of  self-interest 
not  to  trust  those  men  nor  to  deal  with  them.  If  I  come  up  here,  or  to  the 
Mayor  and  Aldermen  of  the  city,  to  obtain  a  license,  and  find  that  I  must 
enter  into  certain  bonds,  and  that  I  must  agree  to  all  sorts  of  stipulations, 
which  will  restrain  the  business,  and  then  that  I  must  pay  a  certain  amount 
for  the  privilege  of  carrying  on  that  business,  it  then  becomes  a  matter  of 
self-interest  that  I  should  not  allow  any  one  to  open  an  establishment  near  me 
and  go  on  without  a  license.  I  then  become  one  of  the  police  myself,  and  I 
become  among  the  first  to  inform  against  him ;  thus  I  think  we  should  incline 
to  unite  with  the  men  in  the  legitimate  business  in  the  suppression  of  the 
improper  sale,  and  that  great  good  would  result  in  that  way. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Do  you  not  think  it  would  be  a  very  useful  thing 
if  some  system  of  general  inspection  of  liquors  could  be  pursued,  with  a  view 
of  protecting  persons  against  poisonous  liquors  fraudulently  sold  them  ? 

A.     I  do,  sir. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  of  the-character  and  quality  of  a  large  propor- 
tion of  the  liquors  now  sold  ? 

A.  I  believe,  sir,  it  is  very  bad,  indeed.  I  think  it  was  never-worse,  and 
not  possible  to  make  it  worse. 

Q.  Then  in  respect  to  the  private  and  illicit  distillation,  are  you  able  to 
form  an  opinion  whether  it  has  a  tendency  now  to  increase  or  not  ? 

A.  As  a  general  principle,  I  should  say  that  it  has.  I  have  always 
believed  that  the  higher  the  tax  was  the  greater  the  temptation  was  for  men 
to  distill  illicitly.  I  know  it  is  offered  every  day  at  a  very  cheap  rate.  The 
tax  on  a  gallon  of  whiskey  is  $2.00 ;  but  there  is  a  plenty  of  what  is  called 
whiskey  which  is  sold  for  $1.25  or  $1.50.  That  is  the  kind  these  people  buy 
and  sell.  « 

Q.  And  that  is  largely  sold,  is  it  not,  under  cover,  and  beyond  the  reach 
of  even  common  ordinary  inspection  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  so  that,  to  my  certain  knowledge  (in  the  manner  that  I  used 
the  expression  some  while  since),  it  is  peddled  about  the  city.  An  Irish 
woman  can  buy  a  gallon  and  take  it  to  her  room  or  any  place  that  she  sees 
fit,  and  then  she  can  receive  her  guests,  and  the  first  thing  we  know  is  that 
somebody  comes  out  of  there  inebriated.  You  may  go  into  that  house,  and 
you  will  find  no  proof  of  the  sale  of  liquor  there.  You  cannot  find  a  tumbler 
81 


642  APPENDIX. 

or  a  pitcher,  though  you  may  find  a  bowl  perhaps.  Now,  that  article  that 
they  have  been  drinking,  is,  in  my  opinion,  injurious.  It  causes  delirium  of 
the  brain,  and  it  encourages  all  the  pugnacious  qualities  of  these  people. 

Q.    More  maddening  than  ordinary  liquor  ? 

A.     Of  course. 

Q.  No\v  supposing  we  carry  the  supposition  one  step  farther.  Supposing 
that  the  sale  of  pure  liquors  and  good  wines  was  driven  off  from  the  sur- 
face, so  that  it  was  no  longer  feasible  to  obtain  it,  and  no  respectable  person 
sold  it  at  all  in  any  form,  from  what  you  know  and  have  learned  during  your 
experience  and  observation  for  years,  have  you  any  doubt  that  private  and 
domestic  distillation  would  take  the  place  of  the  present  modes  of  production, 
and  that  a  private  illicit  and  contraband  sale  would  supply  the  wants  of  all 
these  people  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  in  the  world  of  it,  sir.  I  believe,  as  I  have  said  before, 
that  where  human  appetite  claims  it,  human  ingenuity  will  produce  it,  and 
will  have  it. 

Q.  And  the  same  use  would  be  a  thousand  times  more  beyond  the  reach 
and  control  of  authority,  whether  by  its  legal  or  moral  influence,  than  it 
now  is  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  What  facilities  would  you  as  license  men  have  for 
suppressing  the  business  of  that  Irish  woman  that  the  State  does  not  have 
now  ? 

A.  We  do  not  propose  to  take  the  sale  into  our  own  hands  as  license  men, 
but  we  propose  to  carry  on  our  business. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  you  can  suppress  the  unlicensed  trafficker  when  the 
police  cannot  ? 

A.    I  mean  that  I  can  aid  the  police  in  that  matter. 

Q.  Then  you  would  in  that  matter  render  aid  under  a  license  system 
where  you  would  not  lend  it  now  ? 

A.    I  do  propose  to  turn  myself,  sir,  yet,  into  a  State  Constable. 

Q.  But  if  you  were  licensed,  you  would  render  aid  to  the  police  author- 
ities ? 

A.    I  stated  that  it  would  be  for  my  interest  to  do  so. 

Q.    That  is,  when  your  interest  required  it  you  would  do  so  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  regard  to  the  quality  of  liquors,  would  there  be  any  facility  or  any 
means  of  testing  liquors  which  would  operate  better  for  suppressing  the  traffic, 
turning  on  the  quality  of  liquors,  than  there  would  be  under  the  existing  law, 
in  seizing  the  whole  stock  ?'  • 

A.    If  I  understand  the  nature  of  your  question. 

Q.  My  question  is  simply  this.  You  spoke  of  the  inspection  of  liquor, 
•did  you  not  ? 

A.    I  did. 

Q.  My  question  is  what  possible  advantage  there  is  in  the  inspection,  offi- 
cially, of  liquor,  for  the  furthering  of  the  interests  of  the  community  in  that 
tregard,  that  is  not  involved  in  the  present  law  ? 


APPENDIX.  643 

A.  I  have  doubt  that  if  you  seize  all  that  a  man  has  got,  you  can  find  out 
what  it  is  very  easily.  I  thought  your  question  referred  to  the  quality  of 
liquor. 

Q.  I  refer  to  the  question  of  removing  from  the  community  the  very  bad 
liquors.  We  would  remove  them  by  seizure.  Is  your  method  better  than  the 
present  ? 

A.     I  think  it  would  be. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  Did  you  obtain  a  license  from  the  United 
States  ? 

A.    I  did. 

Q.    Have  you  one  now  ? 

A.    I  have. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  taken  pains  to  prosecute,  or  obtain  the  prosecution  of 
unlicensed  persons  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Then  if  you  do  not  take  pains  to  prosecute,  having  a  United  States 
license,  why  would  you  do  so  any  more  under  a  State  license  ? 

A.  Because  it  has  been  judicially  decided  that  the  United  States  license 
does  not  protect  me. 

Q.     Did  you  before  that  decision  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Then  would  your  State  license  induce  you  to  do  it  any  more  ? 

A.  The  United  States  license  is  entirely  general  in  its  terms.  It  places 
me  under  no  restriction.  It  offers  me  no  law  of  regulation  at  all.  It  is  sim- 
.  ply  presented  to  me  by  the  officer  of  the  revenue,  as  something  which  we 
I  must  do,  and  which  I  know  nothing  about.  The  State  license  offers  me 
something  which  protects  me  in  my  business  ;  and  if  I  see  a  party  near  me 
who  has  no  right  to  pursue  the  business,  I  should  proceed  against  him. 

Q.  Does  that  give  you  the  right  to  deal  in  these  articles  which  the 
United  States  license  would  not  ? 

A.     The  National  Government  gives  us  no  right;  it  only  taxes  us. 

Q.  I  have  heard  your  statement.  I  want  to  ask  you  one  question  more. 
You  may  answer  my  question  or  not,  just  as  you  please.  You  know  that 
it  is  a  violation  of  the  laws  of  Massachusetts  to  sell  intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.     I  know  there  is  a  law  to  that  effect. 

Q.  I  will  ask  you  (and  you  need  not  answer  the  question  unless  you 
choose),  how  you  can  as  a  citizen  of  the  Commonwealth,  justify  any  one  in 
knowingly  and  daily  violating  a  law  of  the  Commonwealth  which  protects 
you  and  all  your  rights  ? 

Q.     (By  Mr.  KICHARDS.)     How  can  I  justify  myself  ? 

A.     (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)    Yes,  sir. 

A.  That  is  something  which  we  have  been  looking  for,  and  are  looking 
for  now  in  a  change  of  the  law. 

Q.  Taking  the  law  as  an  existing  law  of  the  Commonwealth  of  which  you 
are  a  citizen,  how  can  you  as  a  good  citizen  justify  any  man  in  daily  violating 
a  known  law  of  the  Commonwealth  of  which  he  is  a  citizen  ? 


644  APPENDIX. 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  am  only  one  in  the  matter.  I  justify  myself  in  the  same 
way  that  a  thousand  good  and  respectable  and  intelligent  men  in  this  com- 
munity justify  themselves  in  coming  in  and  asking  me  to  break  it. 

Q.     That  is  your  rule  ? 

A.    I  have  no  rule. 

Q.     Have  you  no  other  reason  to  give  ? 

A.    I  have  no  particular  reason. 

TESTIMONT  OF 'WILLIAM  H.  Fox. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  reside  in  Taunton  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.    You  are  judge  of  what  court  ? 

A.    I  am  judge  of  the  Municipal  Court  in  Taunton. 

Q.  You  know  the  question  here  between  a  prohibitory  or  license  law.  I 
should  like  your  judgment  in  regard  to  it. 

A.  I  do  not  know  much  of  the  working  of  the  old  license  law,  as  it  was 
repealed  before  I  knew  much  about  it.  As  to  the  working  of  the  prohibitory 
law  in  Taunton,  I  should  think  that  two  years  ago  there  was  as  much  liquor 
sold  in  Taunton  as  ever  there  was.  It  appeared  to  be  very  much  restricted. 
Places  were  very  numerous  where  liquor  could  be  had.  Up  to  that  time  we 
had  existed  as  a  town  government,  the  city  charter  being  given  January  1st, 
1866 ;  and  there  were  no  police  on  duty  and  no  officers  to  prosecute  liquor- 
sellers  :  so  that  the  prosecutions  made  before  the  granting  of  the  city  charter 
were  mainly  made  by  prominent  temperance  people,  who  at  times,  by  con- 
certed action,  sent  a  batch  of  complaints  to  the  jury,  and  had  several  of  the 
dealers  arrested  and  tried  and  sometimes  convicted.  These  efforts  on  the 
part  of  the  temperance  men  were  intermittent,  and  proved  ineffectual, 
although  sometimes  shops  were  closed  by  their  efforts.  But  more  were  opened 
than  were  closed.  In  1866,  under  the  city  government,  we  had  a  board  of 
government  friendly  to  the  temperance  cause.  The  City  Marshal  and 
assistant  tried,  I  think,  to  enforce  the  law  as  well  as  they  could.  They  first 
ordered  the  sellers  to  close  their  shops  at  ten  o'clock  every  night,  and  to  keep 
closed  on  the  Sabbath.  This  law  was  obeyed  after  several  prosecutions. 
The  liquor-dealers  had  no  objections,  as  long  as  it  worked  universally.  That 
stopped  drinking  carousal  in  the  street.  Some  efforts  were  made  to  suppress 
the  sale  further  than  that;  and  quite  a  number  of  prosecutions  were  made  by 
the  city  marshal.  But  during  that  year,  the  United  States  license  question 
was  before  the  Supreme  Court,  and  the  liquor-dealers  seemed  to  think  that  as 
long  as  this  question  was  open  they  were  safe.  So  that  during  the  year  I  do 
not  think  much  was  accomplished  in  stopping  the  sale  of  liquor,  except  in  tl.e 
night-time  and  on  the  Sabbath,  as  I  have  already  stated. 

Q.     This  was  in  1865  that  you  have  been  speaking  of? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  1865;  I  said  1866.  This  month,  I  think,  the  first  seizure  by 
the  State  Constabulary  was  made  in  Taunton.  The  stock  of  the  three  largest 
dealers  were  successfully  seized,  amounting  in  all  to  five  or  six  thousand  dollars 
in  value.  One  of  these  dealers  whose  liquors  were  seized  had  been  up  to  that 
time  the  leading  liquor-seller.  I  should  call  him  the  representative  liquor- 
seller,  except  that  he  was  the  most  respectable  of  the  dealers.  He  was  a  mau 


APPENDIX.  645 

whom  temperance  men.  often  approached  for  the  purpose  of  arguing  with  him 
on  the  question.  A  great  deal  of  moral  suasion  had  been  used  and  wasted  on 
him.  Prosecutions  had  been  made  and  a  great  deal  of  money  had  been  made, 
but  nothing  had  been  done  in  any  way  to  stop  his  selling  liquor.  But  his 
liquors  were  seized ;  and  from  that  time  to  this  he  has  not  sold  a  drop  of 
liquor.  His  establishment  is  turned  into  a  respectable  clothing  establishment, 
and  rented  to  parties  in  Boston,  who  have  rented  it  for  a  term  of  years.  One 
other  is  also  stopped.  So  that  of  the  three  whose  liquors  were  seized,  two 
have  stopped.  That  was  the  first  blow  to  the  liquor-dealers  in  Taunton,  of 
any  importance.  It  frightened  them  more  than  anything  else  that  I  have 
ever  known.  The  traffic  has  been  unsettled  since  then.  And  I  have  heard 
that,  when  the  State  Constable  has  been  expected,  large  quantities  of  liquors 
have  been  removed  to  some  place  where  they  could  be  kept  out  of  sight.  I 

think  that  the  stopping  of  this  place  of  Mr. was  one  of  the  best  things 

that  the  State  Constabulary  could  have  done.  I  think  that  single  suppression 
would  pay  all  the  expenses  of  the  Constabulary  in  the  town  of  Taunton  since 
they  have  been  established.  He  was  the  largest  rumseller,  and  the  smaller 
sellers  have  referred  to  him,  and  said  that  he  was  making  money  out  of  the 
business,  and  asked  why  his  place  was  not  stopped.  I  think  it  has  had  a 
remarkable  influence.  In  July  of  last  year,  a  State  Constable  was  appointed 
for  Taunton.  He  immediately  commenced  a  vigorous  execution  of  the  law ; 
and  while  he  was  in  office  (until  the  first  of  January  of  this  year),  I  think  the 
results  of  his  efforts  were  very  marked  and  decided.  A  few  years  ago,  in 
"  Rum  Hollow,"  as  it  was  called,  stores  and  liquor  shops  were  open  on  both 
sides  of  the  street  at  any  time,  and  people  passing  by  could  get  their  jugs  and 
demijohns  filled,  and  the  sale  was  very  exposed,  and  the  odor  of  liquor  was 
very  perceptible  in  the  street.  To-day  there  is  not  one  shop  where  it  is  kept 
that  I  know  of;  there  may  be  one  place  where  it  is  kept.  What  I  have  said 
of  "  Rum  Hollow  "  is  substantially  true  of  the  city.  I  do  not  think  that  there 
are  one-third  as  many  places  open  now  as  there  were  a  year  ago. 

Q.     And  none  of  them  public  ? 

A.  Very  few  of  them,  I  think,  that  are  open.  There  are  two  or  three 
that  I  should  call  open  shops.  They  usually  keep  a  watch,  I  think,  at  the 
windows,  and  look  out  for  suspicious  persons  like  the  State  Constables. 

Q.  Do  you  feel  that  it  has  diminished  the  sale  of  liquors  there  a  good 
deal  ? 

A.  I  do,  sir.  I  think  that  not  only  the  sale  but  the  use  of  liquor  has 
decreased.  It  is  a  fact  well  known  and  frequently  spoken  of  that  less  liquor 
ifi  irani  now  than  a  year  ago. 

Q.  You  attribute  to  the  fact  of  the  law  being  carried  out  by  the  State 
Police  ? 

A.    I  do,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  ANDREW  POLLARD. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     Of  what  denomination  are  you  a  clergyman  ? 
A.     Baptist. 

Q.    You  reside  in  Taunton  ? 
A.    I  do. 


646  APPENDIX. 

Q.  You  have  heard  the  testimony  of  Judge  Fox — does  your  observation 
agree  with  his  ? 

A.    It  does  very  generally  and  very  decidedly. 

Q.  Have  you  been  in  the  habit  of  looking  into  this  matter  of  intemper- 
ance ? 

A.  I  have,  sir.  The  cause  is  one  that  I  have  been  much  interested  in  for 
many  years,  and  I  have  watched  things  very  closely. 

Q.     You  are  very  strongly  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory  law. 

A.    I  am. 

Q.     And  of  the  State  Constabulary  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  think  there  are  reasons  very  important  and  very  conclusive, 
why  I  should  favor  the  present  law  and  the  efforts  of  the  State  Constabulary 
to  enforce  that  law. 

Q.     Will  you  please  give  them  briefly  ? 

A.  In  the  first  place,  I  believe  that  the  prohibitory  law  is  right  in  princi- 
ple, and  that  the  license  law  would  be  essentially  wrong  in  principle,  and  I 
have  observed  that  whatever  is  wrong  in  principle  never  works  well  practi- 
cally. 

Q.  You  believe  with  Governor  Andrew  that  it  is  safe  to  stick  to  good 
principles  ? 

A .  I  do  most  decidedly.  I  also  believe  that  the  prohibitory  lawr  if  properly 
enforced  by  the  State  Constabulary,  would  very  largely  suppress  the  sale  and 
use  of  spirituous  liquors.  I  have  no  faith  in  any  other  means.  I  have  sonic 
remembrance  of  the  old  license  law,  and  some  knowledge  of  license  laws  in 
other  States.  I  have  no  faith  in  the  efficiency  of  such  laws  to  suppress  the 
illicit  sale  of  spirituous  liquors. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  lived  in  Taunton  ? 

A.    Nearly  eighteen  years. 

Q.  Have  you  any  information  in  regard  to  the  license  laws  in  Rhode 
Island  ? 

A.    I  have  some. 

Q.  Has  it  done  anything  to  suppress  the  sale  of  liquor  there  ?  Does  not 
everybody  sell  in  Rhode  Island  that  desires  to  ?  What  is  your  opinion,  derived 
from  any  facts  that  you  may  have  learned  ? 

A ,  My  opinion  is  that  the  license  law  of  Rhode  Island  has  been  as  widel  y 
violated  by  the  illicit  sale  of  liquor,  as  the  Massachusetts  prohibitory  law,  in 
proportion  to  the  population.  I  believe  that  it  is  generally  considered  that 
it  has  been  almost  universally  violated  by  those  who  have  sold. 

Q.  All  that  you  have  read,  or  observed,  or  reflected  upon  it  has  led  you  to 
suppose  that  such  is  the  general  effect  of  license  laws  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     And  that  they  have  never  been  efficient  in  restraining  the  traffic  ? 

A.  I  have  some  means  of  knowing  the  public  sentiment  somewhat  upon 
this  subject,  and  one  reason  that  influences  me  very  decidedly  in  favor  of  a 
prohibitory  law  is  that,  according  to  my  best  knowledge  and  judgment, 
the  most  disinterested  and  impartial  judges  favor  prohibitory  legisla- 
tion, and  condemn  a  license  law;  and  that  to  a  very  large  extent, 
the  ooen  and  earnest  advocates  of  a  license  law  are  interested  parties,  parties 


APPENDIX.  647 

biased  cither  by  interest  or  by  appetite  ;  and  I  have  always  observed  that  the 
testimony  of  one  biased  strongly  either  by  appetite  or  by  interest,  though  it 
may  be  given  with  perfect  honesty,  is  to  be  received  with  great  caution.  And 
.  parties  who  are  disinterested,  men  who  do  not  wish  to  drink  or  to  sell,  are  very 
generally,  according  to  my  observation,  opposed  to  a  license  law  and  in  favor 
of  prohibition. 

*    Q.    Is  there  anything  more  that  you  would  like  to  state — anything  that 
you  deem  important  ? 

A.  As  one  who  feels  a  great  deal  of  interest  in  young  men,  I  deprecate 
very  much  the  giving  of  the  legal  sanction  of  the  Commonwealth  to  the  sale 
of  spirituous  liquors.  Young  men  begin  to  drink  in  the  most  respectable 
places  where  liquor  is  sold.  Very  generally  they  will  not  go  into  the  hidden 
and  degrading  places,  if  they  have  not  already  learned  to  drink  in  places 
more  respectable.  If  I  had  no  other  interest  in  this  measure,  I  should  deplore 
the  consequences  of  giving  the  sanction  of  the  Commonwealth  to  the  sale  of 
spirituous  liquors,  even  to  the  most  respectable  men  who  arc  engaged  in  such 
a  business.  I  fear  that  such  a  policy  would  be  hostile  to  good  morals,  unsafe 
to  our  young  men,  and  in  many  instances  very  destructive. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  You  made  some  remark  just  now  about  the  opin- 
ions of  gentlemen  who  express  their  judgment  against  the  present  law  as 
being  properly  subject  to  a  certain  deduction  as  to  their  value,  because  such 
people  are  usually  influenced  either  by  their  appetite  for  drink,  or  by  their 
pecuniary  interest  as  dealers  ? 

A.  My  statement  was  that  the  open  and  most  earnest  advocates  of  a 
license  law  are  very  generally  those  who  are  either  biased  by  their  interest 
or  appetite. 

Q.  Do  you  profess  to  be  acquainted  with  the  twenty  thousand  men 
who  have  petitioned  for  this  law  ? 

A.    Not  with  all  of  them,  but  I  know  a  sample  of  them. 

Q.  Do  you  apply  the  remark  you  have  just  now  made,  to  the  gentlemen 
who  have  testified  before  this  Committee, — to  such  gentlemen  as  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Bacon,  Rev.  Dr.  Todd,  Rev.  Dr.  Blakely,  Rev.  Dr.  Neale,  Bishop  Eastburn, 
and  a  large  class  of  other  gentlemen,  who  have  testified  and  expressed  their 
opinion  in  favor  of  the  license  law.  Do  you  desire  your  remark  to  be  applied 
to  those  gentlemen  ? 

A.    I  do  not  make  any  such  application  of  it. 

Q.  Then  what  value  do  you  wish  the  Committee  to  attach  to  the  remark 
as  a  part  of  your  testimony  ?  You  understand  that  the  Committee  are  sitting 
here  to  estimate  and  consider  and  weigh,  the  opinions  and  facts  they  receive 
in  evidence  before  them,  according  to  their  value.  Now,  if  you  make  that 
remark  at  all,  do  you  not  either  make  it  with  the  intent  that  it  shall  be  applied 
to  those  gentlemen  who  have  testified,  or  else  do  you  make  it  as  something  of 
no  value  at  all  and  simply  as  a  fling  ? 

A.  I  disclaim  entirely  any  intent  of  making  it  as  a  fling.  I  made  it  as  my 
deep  conviction.  I  applied  the  remark  to  the  open  advocates  of  a  license  law, 
not  to  the  witnesses.  I  suppose  that  the  witnesses  were  ordered  to  appear 
here  and  give  their  testiniony,  and,  therefore,  I  do  not  regard  them  as  advo* 
cates ;  but  I  know  that  in  the  community  in  which  I  live,  the  men  who  are 


648  APPENDIX. 

interested,  are  all  in  favor  of  a  license  law.  I  do  not  know  any  exceptions 
whatsoever.  This  is  true  in  Fall  River,  in  New  Bedford,  and  in  Boston,  so 
far  as  I  am  acquainted. 

Q.  Then  you  exclude  the  gentlemen  who  testified  in  favor  of  the  petition 
before  the  Committee  from  the  application  of  that  remark  ? 

A.     I  do  not  apply  it  to  them  nor  exclude  them  from  it. 

Q.     Do  you  intend  that  it  shall  be  understood  as  applying  to  them  ? 

A.     I  did  not  make  any  such  application  of  it. 

Q.  Then  I  ask  with  what  intent,  and  for  what  purpose  was  it  made,  if  it 
was  not  made  with  the  view  of  affecting  the  value  of  the  testimony  of  those 
gentlemen  ? 

A.  I  have  no  objection  to  saying  that  I  made  the  remark  simply  upon 
account  of  its  bearing  upon  the  direct  question  here  at  issue.  It  is  a  fact  that 
I  have  observed  so  widely  that  it  seems  to  me  to  be  important. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  of  the  actual,  legitimate  use  of  spirituous  liquors 
and  wines  in  such  a  commonwealth  as  Massachusetts,  and  of  the  number  of 
persons  to  whom  this  remark  of  yours  must  necessarily  apply,  if  it  applies 
outside  of  the  range  of  witnesses  ? 

A.     I  am  aware  that  the  application  is  very  bfoad. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  spirituous  liquors,  and  whiskey  in  particular, 
have  for  the  last  five  and  twenty  years  been  applied  very  generally  for  medi- 
cinal purposes  in  cases  of  tubercular  disease  of  the  lungs  ? 

A .  I  know  that  it  has  been  applied  to  a  very  great  extent,  but  how  widely 
I  cannot  say. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  it  is  regarded  in  the  medical  profession,  as  in  fact 
a  specific  against  tubercular  disease  ? 

A.     I  was  not  aware  that  it  was  regarded  as  a  specific. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  read  the  report  of  Dr.  Swett,  of  New  York,  of  the 
examination  of  the  bodies  of  seventy  men  who  were  brought  into  the  public 
dead-house  of  New  York  City,  who  were  what  are  known  as  "  gutter  drunk- 
ards," none  of  whom  had  tubercular  disease  of  the  lungs  ? 

A.     I  never  heard  of  that. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  that  is  but  one  of  several  facts  and  circum- 
stances that  tend  to  prove  that  it  is  a  specific  remedy  for  incipient  tubercular 
disease  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  not  that  it  is  a  specific.  I  know  that  some  physicians  prescribe 
it  and  that  some  do  not. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  throughout  the  medical  profession,  it  is  almost 
universally  prescribed  ? 

A.    I  am  not  able  to  say. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  the  statistics  of  mortality  show  that  about  one- 
fifth  part  of  all  the  people  who  die  in  Massachusetts,  and,  I  think,  in  New 
England  also,  die  of  tubercular  disease  of  the  lungs  ? 

A .     I  am  aware  that  a  very  large  proportion  of  them  do. 

Q.  Then  that  shows,  does  it  not,  that  as  a  matter  of  medical  treatment, 
about  one-fifth  part  of  the  whole  population  of  Massachusetts,  either  must,  or 
properly  may,  use  whiskey  daily  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  that  follows  at  all. 


APPENDIX.  649 

Q.    Must  or  may,  I  said,  under  competent  medical  advice  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  as  I  could  admit  that  as  a  fact.  I  do  not  know  what  is 
the  proportion. 

Q  Supposing  that  to  be  the  proportion,  does  not  that  show  that  at  least 
one  person  in  every  family  in  Massachusetts  upon  an  average,  some  time  or 
other  during  the  course  of  the  year,  either  must  or  may  very  properly  and 
under  competent  medical  advice  of  the  highest  characterise  some  such 
article  as  a  matter  of  daily  use  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt,  sir,  that  it  is  used  and  may  be  used  somewhat  exten- 
sively for  medicinal  purposes. 

Q.  And  taken  daily,  as  some  of  the  witnesses  have  testified  here,  for 
months  or  years  together  by  a  man  who  is  able  to  pursue  his  usual  daily 
profession  or  calling  ? 

A.  I  am  not  aware  of  such  testimony,  or  of  such  a  use  under  medical 
advice. 

Q.  Then,  are  you  not  willing,  in  view  of  your  ignorance  of  facts  which 
are  known  to  exist  and  have  been  testified  to  by  gentlemen  before  the  Com- 
mittee, to  be  somewhat  charitable  in  your  consideration  of  the  motives  of 
men  who  take  upon  themselves  the  responsibility,  before  a  grave  tribunal, 
of  expressing  their  views  in  respect  to  a  matter  of  such  deep  concern  ? 

A.  Certainly,  I  took  that  fully  into  consideration  before  I  made  the  remark, 
and  see  no  reason  now  why  I  should  qualify  it. 

Q.    But  then  you  do  not  apply  the  remark  to  those  who  have  testified  ? 

A.  I  would  apply  the  remark  to  a  witness  who  testified  an  hour  ago  and 
affirmed  his  interest  in  the  liquor  business,  and  declared  that  that  interest 
would  lead  him  to  give  information  that  would  result  in  the  prosecution  of 
illicit  dealers. 

Q.  Is  there  any  occasion  for  you,  as  a  minister  of  the  Gospel,  to  come  up 
here  and  make  any  such  a  remark  as  that  in  reference  to  Mr.  Richards.,  who 
came  here  involuntarily,  at  the  summons  of  these  Remonstrants,  to  answer  the 
questions  that  were  put  to  him  politely,  and  without  aspersing  anybody  ? 

A.  I  think  that  on  a  great  question  like  this  the  whole  truth  should  be 
spoken.  That  was  my  only  aim.  .  I  was  aware  of  the  odium  that  might  be 
attached  to  the  expression  of  such  a  conviction,  nevertheless  I  expressed  it 
and  I  abide  by  it. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  the  disciples,  eighteen  hundred  years  ago, 
undertook  to  make  just  such  remarks  about  other  people  who  did  not  choose  to 
cast  out  devils  in  their  way,  and  do  you  remember  the  rebuke  of  the  Master 
of  us  all  ? 

A.  If  this  devil  can  be  cast  out  at  all — the  devil  of  drunkenness  and  liquor- 
selling— I  will  fellowship  any  man  that  can  do  the  work. 

Q.  Do  you  appear  here  as  a  witness  and  attempt  to  prejudge  that  concern- 
ing which  there  may  be  an  honest  difference  of  opinion,  by  an  uncharitable 
remark  of  that  description,  when  the  Committee  are  in  pursuit  of  the  truth  ? 

A.  I  do  not  deem  the  remark  at  all  uncharitable.  I  remarked  that  the 
prominent  advocates  of  a  license  law  were,  to  the  extent  of  my  knowledge, 
biased  by  interest  or  appetite.  I  fail  to  see  anything  uncharitable  in  the 
remark. 

82 


650  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Supposing  that  were  true,  what  right  has  this  Committee  to  be  affected 
by  that  fact  in  the  judgment  that  they  shall  be  led  to  form  ?  Is  not  the  Legis- 
lature and  the  Committee  bound  to  find  out  the  truth  and  declare  it  if  they 
can,  irrespective  of  the  motives  which  influence  anybody ;  and  can  any  tribu- 
nal, short  of  the  Infinite  tribunal  to  which  you  and  I  have  got  to  answer  at 
last,  assume  properly  to  judge  of  motive  ? 

A.  I  believe  it  is  recognized  as  a  principle  in  law  in  regard  to  evidence 
that,  where  a  witness's  appetite  or-  interest  bias  him,  that  fact  is  to  be  taken 
into  account  by  the  jury. 

Q.     Have  we  put  any  witnesses  of  that  character  upon  the  stand  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know,  sir. 

Q.  Then  where  was  the  propriety  of  your  remark,  taking  this  view  as  just 
now  laid  down  ? 

A.  1  did  not  regard  witnesses  as  advocates  ;  therefore,  my  remark  did  not 
intend  to  apply  to  them.  I  have  no  doubt,  however,  that  it  will  apply  to 
some  who  have  testified  ;  very  likely  to  others.  One  individual  who  has  been 
upon  the  stand  here,  told  me  months  ago  that  he  was  in  the  daily  use  of  spir- 
ituous liquors.  He  was  a  clergyman,  I  regret  to  say. 

Q.  Therefore,  you  think  it  proper  to  asperse  the  motives  with  which  that 
gentleman  testified  ? 

A.    Not  at  all,  sir. 

Q.     But  still  you  adhere  to  your  remark  ? 

A.  I  do,  but  not  to  asperse  his  motives.  His  motives  may  be  good  ;  but 
interest  biases  men,  notwithstanding  their  statements  may  be  made  conscien- 
tiously, and  in  all  sincerity.  I  believe  that  every  lawyer  understands  that 
principle,  and  uses  it  in  court  very  freely. 

Q.  I  am  very  sorry  to  have  the  bar,  so  far  as  I  am  acquainted  with  it, 
judged  by  the  remark  you  have  just  made  and  adhered  to.  I  have  never  been 
educated  in  any  such  a  bar  myself.  You  have  alluded  to  the  necessity  of 
exercising  a  good  influence  over  young  men,  and,  therefore,  you  think  it 
important  that  the  Commonwealth  should  prevent,  if  possible,  liquors  and 
wines  from  being  sold  within  the  State,  lest  they  might  pervert  the  young — is 
that  true  ? 

A.  That  is  one  of  my  objections  to  a  license  law,  that  it  proposes  to  license 
the  most  respectable  class  of  liquor-dealers.  Their  houses  would  probably 
be  attractive  places  to  the  young.  I  greatly  fear  that  their  influence  would 
be  to  demoralize  young  men.  The  young  begin  to  drink  there ;  they  form 
the  habit  of  drinking  in  respectable  places. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  the  object  or  intent  of  the  law  is  to  license 
drinking-places  as  such  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  definitely  what  is  desired.  I  only  speak  from  the  sug- 
gestions that  I  have  heard  made. 

Q.  The  apprehension  then  that  you  feel  is  confined  to  that  class  of 
places ? 

A.  No,  sir.  It  attaches  to  the  sale  of  spirituous  liquors,  either  to  be  used 
on  the  place,  or  to  be  carried  home. 

Q.  Then  you  object  to  liquors  being  sold  there  to  be  drank  upon  the 
premises,  or  to  be  carried  home  ? 


APPENDIX.  651 

A.  I  object  to  the  sale  unless  it  be  done  by  the  agent  under  the  direction 
and  for  the  purposes  provided  by  law. 

Q.     Do  you  consider  that  the  agent  is  or  is  not  a  respectable  man  ? 

A.     The  agents  of  this  State  ? 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  licensing  an  agent  takes  him  out  of  the  category 
of  respectable  men  ;  and  if  not,  does  not  your  objection  to  licensing  a  respec- 
table man  apply  with  equal  force  to  the  agent  ? 

A.  I  think  not.  A  sale,  sanctioned  by  law,  of  spirituous  liquors  to  be  used 
medicinally,  or  in  the  arts,  is  entirely  respectable,  if  such  sale  be  necessary ; 
and  it  is  my  conviction  that  it  may  be-  necessary. 

Q.  You  would  have  a  law  undertake  to  supervise  the  use  made  by  citizens 
of  a  counnercial  article  ? 

A.    1  have  made  no  such  statement. 

Q.     But  does  not  your  statement  moan  that,  if  it  means  anything  ? 

A.     I  think  it  applies  exclusively  to  the  selling  and  drinking  of  liquor. 

Q.  If  it  applies  exclusively  to  the  selling  and  drinking,  is  not  the  sale  itself 
an  injurious  and  an  immoral  one  as  soon  as  the  sale  is  effected  ? 

A.     Do  you  mean  the  sale  to  be  used  as  a  beverage  ? 

Q.  The  use  is  not  a  part  of  the  sale;  the  use  is  subsequent  to  the 
purchase. 

A.  I  think  the  sale  of  spirituous  liquors  to  be  used  as  a  beverage  in  this 
Commonwealth,  is  a  crime  and  a  wrong. 

Q.  I  have  no  occasion  or  disposition  to  quarrel  with  your  private  con- 
science, or  to  interfere  with  your  own  affairs  by  the  light  of  your  conscience, 
but  I  am  endeavoring  to  hold  your  mind  to  a  contemplation  of  your  own 
proposition,  that  the  effect  of  a  sale  of  spirituous  liquors  upon  the  young  men 
is  injurious  because  of  the  temptation  and  influence.  I  now  call  your  atten- 
tion to  the  fact  that  the  agents  of  the  Commonwealth  sell  spirituous  liquors 
which  young  men  may  see  sold  or  they  may  purchase. 

A .  My  point  is,  that  as  one  who  feels  some  interest  in  the  preservation  of 
the  morals  of  young  men  and  the  welfare  of  the  young  generally,  beginning 
with  the  principle,  in  which  I  firmly  believe,  that  the  use  of  spirituous  liquors 
is  injurious  as  a  general  rule,  and  indeed,  in  my  opinion,  in  all  cases  excepting 
when  used  as  a  medicine, — my  point  is  that  it  is  injurious,  and  the  danger  of 
forming  habits  of  intemperance  is  very  great ;  that,  if  the  liquor  traffic  of  the 
Commonwealth  is  branded  as  something  wrong  and  improper  and  injurious? 
so  that  it  is  thereby  driven  into  dark  places,  as  theft  and  gambling  are  driven 
into  dark  places,  where  they  ought  to  be  if  they  exist  at  all,  young  men  will 
not  be  half  so  likely  to  come  into  the  low  groggeries  to  learn  to  drink  spirit- 
uous liquors  and  acquire  habits  of  intemperance,  as  if  liquor  was  sold  in  more 
respectable  places  and  under  the  sanction  of  the  law.  In  a  licensed  hotel,  I 
can  go  in  and  buy  brandy  and  wine  with  my  dinner.  I  can  go  into  a  licensed 
store  and  buy  a  bottle  of  brandy  and  carry  it  to  my  room.  It  is  lawful  to  do 
it.  I  fear  that  if  such  facilities  are  offered  for  the  purchase  of  liquor  in  such 
respectable  places,  the  result  will  be  the  ruin  of  many  young  men,  while  if 
these  sales  were  not  made  honorable  and  given  the  sanction  of  the  law,  they 
would  be  saved. 


G52  APPENDIX. 

A.  Then  it  is  not  the  facility  with  which  liquor  is  obtained  that  influences 
your  judgment,  but  it  is  the  desire  to  procure  the  stamping  of  moral  condem- 
nation by  the  law  upon  the  sale  ? 

A.    Not  entirely  that. 

Q.     Which  is  it  ? 

A.     It  is  both. 

Q.    You  want  both  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  the  first  place  to  make  it  inconvenient  for  people  to  get  liquor. 
That  is  one  thing  you  want  to  do  by  the  law  ? 

A.    Not  merely  inconvenient,  but  to  make  the  getting  of  it  disgraceful. 

Q.  You  want  a  law  to  make  it  inconvenient  for  people  to  get  what  by  law 
they  have  the  right  to  get  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  do  not  admit  that  as  my  proposition.  I  want  it  to  be  per- 
fectly convenient  to  get  what  they  need  and  are  allowed  to  use  for  the 
purposes  specified  in  the  present  law. 

Q.  That  is  arguing  in  a  circle.  The  question  is  now  what  the  law  ought 
to  be.  You  want  in  the  first  place,  if  I  understand  you,  to  have  the  law 
render  it  inconvenient  for  people  to  get  spirituous  liquors.  That  is  one  thing 
you  want  to  do  for  the  prctection  of  the  young,  is  it  not  ? 

A.  I  do  not  want  the  sale  of  liquor  to  be  made  respectable  and  attractive 
to  the  young. 

Q.  Do  you  or  do  you  not  take  the  ground  that  you  want  to  render  it 
inconvenient  ? 

A.  Certainly,  when  it  is  to  be  used  as  a  beverage.  I  would  also  render  it 
unattractive  and  repulsive. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  you  want  to  make  it  inconvenient  and  disgraceful, 
or  disgraceful  without  being  inconvenient  ? 

A.  I  should  like  to  have  it  so  that  if  I  had  sons  in  danger,  the  law  would 
so  regulate  the  matter  that  it  would  be  inconvenient  for  them  to  purchase  (it 
is  always  best  to  have  the  temptation  inconvenient),  and  not  be  led  into  it. 
Then  I  would  have  the  sale  odious.  I  want  my  sons  and  young  friends  to  feel 
that  they  are  lowering  themselves  by  buying  spirituous  liquors.  I  think  it  is 
something  that  injures  them. 

Q.  Then  you  desire  the  law  to  take  the  morals  and  the  education  of  young 
men,  in  respect  to  morality,  into  its  custody,  do  you  not  ? 

A.     To  some  extent.     I  do,  so  far  as  it  is  proper,  but  not  exclusively. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  anybody  in  the  Commonwealth  that  teaches  that 
doctrine  ? 

A.    I  do  myself,  and  I  supposed  that  it  was  commonly  taught. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  JOHN  W.  WILLETT. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  have  heard  the  testimony  of  the  gentlemen 
from  Taunton  ;  do  your  observations  correspond  with  theirs  as  to  the  influ- 
ence of  the  prohibitory  law  and  of  the  State  Constabulary  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  so  far  as  my  observations  extend.  I  have  only  been  there 
for  one  year,  but  during  that  year,  I  am  quite  sure  the  effect  has  been  as 
stated  by  them. 


APPENDIX.  653 

Q.    Have  you  ever  lived  in  Rhode  Island  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Where? 

A.    At  Woonsocket. 

Q.    Have  they  a  license  law  there  ? 

A .    Yes,  sir.  ^ 

Q.  How  did  the  license  law  operate  in  Woonsocket,  so  far  as  you 
observed  ? 

A.  I  never  heard  of  but  one  effect  of  it ;  that  was  to  put  so  many  dollars 
into  the  town  treasury  ? 

Q.    Did  it  ever  do  anything  to  restrict  the  traffic  ? 

A.    Not  in  the  least. 

Q.     Did  other  than  licensed  parties  sell  liquor  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  cannot  vouch  for  the  statement,  but  it  was  commonly 
reported  in  Woonsocket,  that  there  were  thirty-three  places  licensed,  and 
between  fifty  and  sixty  places  that  were  not  licensed  ? 

Q.     Do  you  presume  that  was  something  near  the  number  ? 

A.  I  think  there  must  be  about  that  number,  as  I  knew  of  a  great  many 
places. 

Q.     What  is  the  population  of  Woonsocket  ? 

A.  The  village  embraces  a  part  of  two  towns  ;  the  population  is  probably 
from  seven  to  eight  thousand. 

Q.  That  makes,  then,  nearly  one  hundred  dealers  in  a  population  of 
seven  or  eight  thousand  ? 

A.    About  eighty  or  ninety. 

Q.     There  is  an  effort  now  being  made  to  get  a  more  stringent  license  law  ? 

A.    I  have  been  so  informed. 

Q.     The  present  one  does  not  seem  to  be  satisfactory  ? 

A.  The  people  think  of  increasing  its  stringency.  I  was  in  the  office  of 
the  United  States  Assessor  in  Providence  a  little  while  ago,  with  a  friend,  and 
he  handed  us  a  list  of  persons  licensed,  under  the  United  States  law,  to  sell 
liquor  in  that  city.  It  embraced  over  four  hundred  names.  I  asked  him  if 
those  were  the  names  of  all  the  liquor-sellers  in  Providence,  and  he  said  that 
it  was  not  all ;  he  was  satisfied  that  it  was  not  quite  half  the  number.  I 
asked  him  how  many  of  those  who  were  not  licensed  by  the  United  States, 
had  a  State  or  town  license.  He  replied  that  he  had  called  for  a  fee  from 
every  man  who  had  a  State  or  a  town  license,  so  that  the  United  States 
license  list,  covered,  so  far  as  he  knew,  the  list  licensed  by  the  State  and  city, 
so  that  according  to  his  statement  there  were  more  unlicensed  than  licensed 
liquor-shops  in  Providence. 

Q.     The  general  feeling,  I  suppose,  was  that  the  license  law  had  no  effect  ? 

A.  That  was  the  feeling  in  Woonsocket,  especially.  I  may  say  further, 
upon  this  point,  that  for  the  past  thirty  years,  I  have  been  actively  engaged 
in  promoting  the  temperance  cause,  and  have  taken  all  the  pains  that  I  could 
to  ascertain  all  the  facts  bearing  upon  the  subject. 

Q.     Can  you  give  us  statistics  ? 

A.  I  have  no  definite  statistics  with  me.  I  made  earnest  inquiries  in 
Woonsocket,  and  learned  that  at  no  time,  when  a  license  law  was  the  law  of 


654  APPENDIX. 

the  State,  had  the  rumsellers  ever  taken  any  pains  to  prosecntc  the  violators 
of  that  law.  I  learned  of  one  case,  where  a  few  men  who  had  been  advo- 
cates of  the  license  law,  but  were  not  themselves  dealers,  had  succeeded  in 
getting  a  sma1!  amount  of  funds  from  a  few  liquor-sellers  for  the  purpose  of 
prosecuting  the  law.  That  was  all  that  they  could  do.  Under  the  present 
law  they  had  not  been  able  to  procure  a  single  dollar  to  assist  in  shutting  up 
the  unlicensed  shops.  I  was  intimately  acquainted  with  men  who  were  most 
anxious  to  suppress  the  traffic,  an'd  also  quite  well  acquainted  with  some  of 
the  dealers.  One  of  the  dealers  who  had  a  license,  said  that  he  considered  it 
a  contemptible  piece  of  business  for  him,  selling  liquor  as  he  was,  to  interfere 
•with  anybody  else  engaged  in  the  same  traffic. 

I  can  say,  without  hesitation,  that  in  Woonsocket,  I  saw  more  drunken  men 
in  passing  about  the  streets,  in  a  month,  than  I  have  seen  in  Taunton  in  a 
year,  and  Taunton  is  a  place  of  about  twice  the  size  of  Woonsocket.  There 
was  no  month  that  I  was  there,  in  which  I  did  not  see  more  drunken  persons 
in  the  streets,  than  I  have  seen  in  Taunton  during  the  twelve  months  that  I 
have  lived  there. 

I  have  been  acquainted  with  the  temperance  people, — with  nearly  all  the 
active  temperance  men  in  south-eastern  Massachusetts,  in  Plymouth  and  in 
Barnstable  Counties,  and  I  have  not  met  the  first  man,  who  was  in  former 
years  in  favor  of  prohibition,  who  took  any  active  part  whatever  in  promoting 
the  temperance  cause,  who  now  thinks  it  best  to  have  a  license  law.  This 
morning  I  heard  of  one  man,  whom  I  never  knew,  who  said  that  lie  was  for  a 
license  law.  On  the  other  hand,  not  long  after  the  enactment  of  a  prohibi- 
tory law,  I  was  in  a  Division  of  the  Sons  of  Temperance  upon  one  occasion, 
and  was  called  upon  to  make  some  remarks  "  for  the  good  of  the  Order,"  and 
in  my  remarks  I  approved  heartily  of  the  prohibitory  law.,  and  a  gentlemen 
offered  a  very  earnest  opposition  to  what  I  had  to  say,  and  I  was,  for  the  time 
being,  almost  tabooed  in  that  room  because  of  my  view  of  the  case.  Those 
very  same  men,  since  that  time,  have  taken  the  other  side  of  the  question.  I 
think  that  I  can  count  up  at  least  ten  men,  who  have  changed  in  favor  of  pro- 
hibition, to  every  one  that  I  have  heard  of  as  going  the  other  way. 

Much  testimony,  it  will  not  be  denied,  has  been  presented  to  show  that 
there  has  been  quite  an  increase  of  intemperance  in  the  community.  I  have 
noticed  a  statement  made  by  a  correspondent  of  the  "  Woonsocket  Patriot," 
which  I  think  worthy  of  consideration. 

The  correspondent  himself  was  in  favor  of  a  license  law.  His  statement 
was  that  intemperance  was  more  rapidly  increasing  among  the  better-educated 
and  better-conditioned  class  of  society,  among  those  who  occupy  good  social 
positions,  than  among  the  low  and  degraded  class.  I  think  that  his  statement 
is  correct.  I  think  that  the  increase  of  intemperance,  at  the  present  day,  is 
almost  entirely  among  the  better  class  of  people  ;  among  the  better  off,  the 
better  educated  class  ;  among  persons  who  have  more  refinement  of  manner, 
and  higher  social  position.  The  complaint  is  made  that  intemperance  has 
increased  under  the  prohibitory  liquor  law.  My  observation  is  that  there  has 
been  a  very  great  neglect  in  the  matter  of  educating  the  children  upon  this 
subject.  I  do  not  think  there  has  been  any  great  abatement  of  the  effort  to 
affect  mature  minds,  but  there  has  been  an  abatement  of  effort  to  affect  the 


APPENDIX.  655 

minds  of  the  children.  We  have,  growing  up  around  us,  a  class  of  young 
people  who  have  never  been  well  taught  in  this  principle.  I  also  account  for 
the  increase  of  drunkenness  upon  this  ground :  that  so  many  in  high  author- 
ity and  good  social  position,  have  scouted  the  idea  of  a  prohibitory  law,  and 
have  publicly  set  the  example  of  using  liquors,  and  have  said  that,  in  their 
opinion,  total  abstinence  was  a  foolish  thing,  and  the  young  people  have  fol- 
lowed their  example.  The  increase  in  drunkenness  has  been  in  the  large 
towns.  This  has  been  considered  as  quite  an  argument  against  the  prohib- 
itory law.  I  think  that  in  some  cases  it  is  an  argument  in  favor  of  the  law. 
In  the  large  towns  the  law  has  been  more  defied.  Young  men  on  a  bender, 
and  old  men  on  a  spree,  have  gone  to  the  cities,  as  they  are  not  able  to 
accommodate  themselves  at  home.  So  that  those  gentlemen  who  testify  in 
regard  to  the  increase  of  intemperance  in  the  larger  places,  testify  only 
according  to  their  own  observation  in  those  places.  I  think  that  they  have 
not  scanned  the  whole  field.  I  should  like  to  see  statistics  from  the  whole 
State.  I  doubt  not  that  they  will  show  about  the  same  thing  now  as  formerly. 
I  have  something  to  say  in  regard  to  the  licensing  of  respectable  places.  It 
is  proposed  by  the  license  party,  as  I  understand,  to  license  the  respectable 
places,  and  to  shut  up  the  low,  mean  places.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  increase 
of  crime  among  us  of  late  has  been  very  largely  among  the  better  class  of 
people  ;  among  men  of  better  character,  of  better  position,  of  better  means. 
Who  is  it  that  makes  it  unsafe  for  ladies  to  walk  the  streets  of  our  city  alone 
in  the  evening  ?  I  undertake  to  say  that  it  is  not  the  low,  beastly  fellows  ;  it 
is  not  the  poor,  degraded  foreigners,  nor  Yankees,  as  low  and  debased  as 
they  ;  but  it  is  your  fast  young  men  who  have  been  permitted  to  accost,  on 
terms  of  equality,  ladies,  who  had  some  character.  When  they  get  liquor  in 
them,  they  will  insult  ladies  in  the  street.  Our  murders  and  robberies  have 
been  committed  by  men  of  considerable  character.  Crime  is  not  so  largely 
to  be  laid  at  the  doors  of  the  lower  portion  of  the  community  as  formerly. 
My  observations  have  confirmed  me  in  this  judgment. 

There  are  some  things  that  should  be  remembered  by  this  Committee,  and 
by  the  Legislature,  in  regard  to  the  men  who  come  here  and  ask  for  a  change 
of  this  law.  It  is  of  some  consequence  whether  they  have  been  men  who 
have  been  habitual  violators  of  the  law.  If  these  men  had  submitted  to  the 
law,  and  neither  by  their  practice  induced  others  to  sell,  nor  sold  themselves ; 
if  they  had  done  neither  one  thing  nor  the  other  during  the  years  that  we 
have  had  this  law  upon  the  statute  book,  their  present  testimony  in  favor  of  a 
change  might  be  worthy  more  attention.  That  consideration,  I  think,  has 
something  to  do  with  the  merit  of  their  testimony. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     To  what  particular  murders  do  you  refer  ? 

A.  I  have  no  memorandum  with  me,  and  I  could  not  tell  you,  but  I  have 
noticed  that  a  large  proportion  of  the  persons  were  very  respectably  connected. 

Q.     Were  they  brought  to  commit  the  offences  by  intemperance  ? 

A.  In  some  cases  they  were  and  in  some  cases  they  were  not ;  that  is  not 
the  point. 

Q.     You  were  talking  about  intemperance  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir. 


656  APPENDIX. 

Q.  And  those  cases  of  murder  to  which  you  refer  were  committed  under 
the  influence  of  liquor ;  what  are  the  cases,  where  respectable  young  men 
have  committed  murder  under  the  influence  of  liquor  ? 

A.    I  could  not  name  the  cases. 

Q.     Can  you  name  one  V 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  can.  I  have  not  remarked  the  fact  with  that 
idea. 

Q.    Where  did  you  get  the  idea  ? 

A .  A  great  deal  has  been  said  about  licensing  respectable  places,  and  I 
have  been  looking  to  see  what  has  been  the  effect  of  such  a  practice.  The 
effect,  on  the  whole,  has  been  an  increase  of  intemperance  and  an  increase  of 
crime. 

Q.     Can  you  state  where  it  was  said  that  there  was  an  increase  of  crime  ? 

A.     I  have  looked  to  see  where  it  was. 

Q.     And  if  you  have  looked,  you  have  found  it,  have  you  not  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  If  your  judgment  has  been  assisted  by  the  facts  that  you  have  observed, 
I  should  think  that  at  least  one  of  those  facts  would  remain  in  your  memory. 

A .  I  do  not  remember  any  individual  case.  When  I  have  read  of  a  case 
of  murder,  or  of  an  assault  that  has  ended  in  death,  I  have  inquired,  in  my 
mind,  into  it,  and  I  think  that  two  out  of  three,  of  those  I  have  noticed,  bore 
to  my  mind  that  testimony. 

Q.  Take  those  cases  which  have  occurred  in  Massachusetts  during  any 
series  of  years ;  will  you  refer  to  one  case  where  a  person  of  decent  respecta- 
bility and  standing  in  society,  who  has  committed  a  homicide,  has  done  it 
under  the  influence  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  hold  this  to  be  true  :  if  I  should  see  a  young  man  coming  in  here  and 
talking  a  little  extravagantly,  not  very  much  under  the  influence  of  liquor, 
but  still  talking  and  acting  as  he  would  not  if  he  were  not  under  its  influence, 
I  should  take  it  that  liquor  had  something  to  do  with  it. 

Q.  I  should  be  very  sorry  to  accuse  all  who  have  been  extravagant  on  this 
stand  of  having  taken  liquor,  should  not  you  ? 

A.  I  said  if  he  was  affected  by  liquor,  I  should  take  it  that  what  he  did 
was  the  effect  of  what  he  had  taken. 

Q.  I  do  not  care  how  much  or  how  little  the  effect.  Give  us  a  single  case 
where  any  person  that  you  call  respectable  has  committed  homicide  under  the 
influence  of  liquor. 

A.  I  have  no  case  to  cite  ;  but  that  is  not  the  point  I  aimed  to  make.  I 
aimed  to  say  that  a  large  proportion  of  the  crimes  of  a  grievous  nature,  at  the 
present  time,  are  committed,  not  by  persons  of  the  low  and  base  class,  but  by 
the  more  respectable  class ;  and  if  you  make  liquor  more  accessible  to  this 
class,  the  probability  is  that  crime  will  be  increased. 

Q.  Then  you  leave  entirely  without  remark  the  statement  you  just  made 
concerning  murder  ?  Do  you  stand  by  that  or  retire  from  it  ? 

A.  I  do  not  say  that  a  majority  of  the  crimes  committed  have  been  com- 
mitted by  those  who  were  under  the  influence  of  liquor  ;  but  by  persons  of 
better  education  and  better  habits,  who  are  going  to  be  led  more  and  more  to 


APPENDIX.  657 

commit  such  acts  by  the  liquor  they  will  bo  ablo  to  obtain  under  a  license 
law. 

Q.  Then  a  largo  portion  of  the  grave  offences  committed  in  society  are 
committed  by  persons  of  respectable  standing  V 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  do  not  want  to  say  exactly  "  respectable  standing,"  but  by 
men  who  occupy  good  social  positions. 

Q.     Then  your  statement  is,  that  a  largo  proportion  of  the  grave  offences 
are  committed  by  men  who  occupy  a  good  social  position.    Now,  do  you  find 
thoso  offences  to  have  been  committed  under  the  influence  of  liquor  ? 
A.    In  many  cases ;  but  that  is  not  the  point  I  am  making. 
Q.     If  the  offences  arc  not  committed  under  the  influence  of  liquor,  I  do 
not  see  how  their  consideration  can  be  of  any  value  in  the  present  hearing  ? 

A.  I  will  tell  you  again.  I  take  it  for  granted  that  the  use  of  liquor  tends  to 
the  production  of  crime  upon  the  part  of  those  who  use  it.  That,  I  suppose,  is 
acknowledged  upon  all  hands.  The  petitioners  want  a  law  restraining  the 
use,  because  it  produces  crimes.  Therefore,  I  take  that  for  granted.  You  say 
that  it  is  proposed  in  the  license  law  (and  I  object  to  it  upon  that  ground),  to 
license  res'pec  table  places,  so  that  the  low  and  vile  will  not  be  able  to  get 
liquor,  and  only  the  respectable  people  can  get  it.  Now,  I  say  that  the  crimes 
of  the  country  are  not  so  largely  committed  by  men  of  the  baser  sort  as  among 
a  more  respectable  class,  and  by  those  who  can  obtain  their  liquors  in  these 
respectable  places ;  therefore,  I  say  the  traffic  in  liquor  will  tend  to  continue 
if  not  to  increase  the  crime  committed  by  that  class. 

Q.    But  I  do  not  understand  you  as  saying  that  these  offences  have  been 
caused  or  procured  or  influenced  by  the  fact  of  drinking  ? 
A.    I  do  not  say  one  thing  or  the  other  about  that. 
Q.    You  do  not  show  or  offer  any  evidence  tending  to  show  that  ? 
A.    No,  sir;   that  is  a  matter  which  everybody  understands.    I  do  not 
wish  to  prove  that.    If  I  had  supposed  that  I  was  to  come  here  to  advocate 
the  fundamental  principles  of  the  temperance  cause,  I  would  have  come 
with  a  different  speech. 

Q.     I  want  to  get  at  the  facts  that  are  in  your  possession.    You  have  been 
undertaking  to  give  testimony  of  opinions,  which  opinions  you  would  have  us 
understand  have  been  induced  by  facts  known  to  you. 
A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now  I  want  to  know  what  facts  form  the  basis  upon  which  your 
opinion  rests.  Although  you  say  that  a  very  large  proportion  of  the  criminal 
offences  in  society  are  committed  by  men  in  good  social  position,  I  do  not 
understand  you  to  say  that  those  offences  have  been  caused  or  influenced  by 
drink  ? 

A.  If  that  is  a  point  that  comes  in  here,  I  am  ready  to  answer  it,  and  say 
that  I  think  that  a  very  large '  proportion  of  the  crimes  committed  in  the 
country  are  brought  about  by  the  use  of  liquor. 

Q.  And  are  the  criminal  offences  committed  by  people  of  good  social 
position  committed  under  the  influence  of  liquor  ? 

A.     A  portion  of  them ;  I  think  a  good  many  of  them  are. 

Q.     Can  you  recall  any  cases  that  will  illustrate  your  position  ? 

A.    I  cannot  name  any  now. 

83 


658  APPENDIX. 

Q.     Not  one  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  take  the  papers  and  look  over  the  items;  I  see  it  reported 
that  a  man  is  killed,  or  a  serious  assault  is  committed,  or  some  outrage 
attempted ;  I  endeavor  to  ascertain  how  many  of  the  crimes  were  committed 
by  the  vicious  portion  of  the  community,  and  how  many  by  persons  of  a  better 
class — better  educated — who  occupy  better  social  positions,  and  would  be 
admitted  into  any  respectable  place.  It  is  my  conviction  that  a  very  large 
portion  have  been  committed  under  these  circumstances. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  examined  the  statistics  of  any  statistical  society,  or  of 
any  board  of  social  science,  or  of  any  committee,  or  of  any  man  of  learning, 
in  regard  to  this  matter  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  have  inquired  if  there  were  such,  but  do  not  know  where  to 
find  anything  that  will  give  me  the  information,  and  I  doubt  whether  there 
has  ever  been  any  investigation  upon  that  point. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  of  any  facts  tending  to  prove  that  crime  has 
been  constantly,  and  for  more  than  a  generation  continually  receding  and 
growing  less  and  less,  both  in  number,  quality  and  degree  among  those  people 
who  are  called  respectable,  and  of  good  social  position  ? 

A.  I  presume  that  is  true.  I  do  not  contradict  it.  I  think  that  people 
who  wear  good  cloth  and  are  persons  of  fair  education  and  good  social  posi- 
tion arc  very  likely  to  be  criminal,  and  if  there  are  rum-shops  where  such 
men  can  go  and  get  their  liquor,  as  the  sale  of  rum  multiplies  crime,  it  will 
multiply  crime  among  that  class. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  any  town  or  place  where  men  of  that  descrip- 
tion could  not  get  intoxicating  beverages  if  they  want  it  ? 

A  Yes,  sir  ;  they  could  not  buy  it  in  our  town.  The  great  trouble  in  the 
past  has  been,  that  you  could  not  get  any  Massachusetts  law  in  Boston,  and 
they  could  therefore  obtain  liquor  here. 

Q.  The  means  of  intoxication,  then,  can  be  procured  by  those  who  so 
desire  ? 

A.  I  think,  nevertheless,  that  the  remark  is  true,  that  very  many  young 
men,  who  get  their  liquor  at  respectable  places,  would  not  drink  at  all  if  no 
liquor  was  sold  in  respectable  places. 

Q.  We  are  considering  the  relation  of  crime  to  intemperance ;  you  intro- 
duced the  topic,  and  I  am  cross-examining  you  upon  it.  I  do  not  think  that 
it  is,  a  fair  treatment  of  the  subject  for  you  now  to  retire  from  that  to  another 
topic.  You  have  not,  if  I  understand  you,  made  any  investigations  which 
enable  you  to  show  from  any  statistics  of  any  sort,  the  relation  which  exists 
between  drunkards  and  crime,  among  the  people  of  that  class  ? 

A.  I  do  not  propose  to  introduce  that  subject  here  at  all.  My  objection 
to  a  license  law  is  that  it  opens  places  for  young  men  to  go  and  drink,  who 
otherwise  would  not  drink,  and  because  of  their  drinking  are  likely  to  become 
criminals. 

Q.     Your  objection,  then,  is  to  the  drinking  places  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  the  law  proposes  to  open  them,  and  I  object  to  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  Do  you  wish  to  be  understood  as  saying  that  you 
prefer  that  liquor  should  be  sold  by  disreputable  persons  in  groggeries,  rather 
than  by  respectable  persons  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 


APPENDIX.  659 

TESTIMONY  OF  OLIVER  R.  CLARK. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)    You  reside  in  Winchester  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Your  business  is  in  Boston  ? 

A.    It  is. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  resided  in  Winchester  ? 

A.     Thirty  years,  and  have  been  in  business  in  Boston  twenty-five  years. 

Q.    What  is  the  state  of  temperance  in  Winchester  ? 

A.  We  find  the  law  very  effectually  in  suppressing  intemperance.  During 
the  last  twelve  years  I  have  served  upon  the  Board  of  Selectmen  and  have 
had  pretty  intimate  knowledge  of  the  working  of  the  law  in  our  midst. 

Q.    Will  you  describe  its  working  ? 

A.  We  have  been  enabled  by  it  very  effectual  to  suppress  the  sale  of 
liquor.  No  places  openly  sell,  and  in  a  few  instances  we  have  been  able  to 
suppress  the  secret  sale.  Since  the  State  Constabulary  has  been  in  opera- 
tion we  have  done  it  very  effectually.  All  the  liquor  that  can  be  obtained  has 
been  got  of  the  liquor  agency  most  of  the  time.  We  have  found  the  liquor 
agency  working  well,  if  we  could  get  a  temperance  man  to  take  the  agency. 
If  a  true  lover  of  the  law  took  the  agency,  there  was  no  fault  found  with  the 
liquors.  But  sometimes  we  have  had  men  who  didn't  love  the  law  as  they 
ought,  and  they  have  purchased  their  liquor  in  one  or  two  instances  away 
from  the  State  Agency ;  and  in  such  cases  we  have  had  complaints  of  their 
liquors. 

Q.  Odium  has  been  brought,  I  suppose,  upon  the  State  Agency  by  liquors 
purchased  elsewhere  ? 

A.  It  seemed  to  be  so.  It  is  not  a  matter  that  I  can  positively  state,  how- 
ever. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  their  being  no  open  sale.  Can  there  be  a  secret  sale  to 
any  great  extent  after  such  sale  has  been  detected  ? 

A.  The  secret  sales  are  very  limited  indeed.  If  there  has  been  any  secret 
sale,  and  it  becomes  known,  the  constables  suppress  it  immediately.  This  has 
been  done  in  two  cases. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  one-tenth  part  is  sold  that  would  be>  sold  if  free 
privilege  was  given  to  every  one  ? 

A.  Not  one-tenth  part  is  now  sold  that  there  was  once  sold  in  my  remem- 
brance, when  the  place  was  not  half  as  large  as  now.  My  place  of  business 
in  Boston  is  right  in  the  heart  of  the  low  groggeries. 

Q.     What  is  your  business  ? 

A.  Lumber-dealer,  at  the  corner  of  Beverly  and  Traverse  Streets.  There 
are  a  great  many  groggeries  on  Charlestown  Street,  which  are  also  in  sight 
of  my  place  of  business.  Two  of  them  have  been  closed  by  the  State  Con- 
stables within  one  month.  One  of  them,  I  think,  has  been  re-opened.  During 
the  last  three  months  I  have  not  seen  the  number  of  drunken  persons  in  that 
vicinity,  that  I  previously  did.  I  know  from  my  own  observation  that  the  sale 
of  liquor  there  has  decreased ;  and  I  have  found,  also,  that  those  who  are 
most  strenuous  for  this  license  law,  to  be  persons  who  were  influenced,  as  I 
believe,  by  their  pecuniary  interests,  or  else  by  their  love  of  strong  drink. 
The  respectable,  religious,  solid  men  of  the  country  towns  whom  I  know  (I 


660  APPENDIX. 

am  acquainted  with  a  great  many  besides  my  own),  are  almost  universally  in 
favor  of  the  prohibitory  law.  I  should  say  that  in  the  country  towns,  nine-tenths 
of  all  the  voters  with  the  dominant  party  of  this  State,  were  in  favor  of  that  law. 
I  remember  distinctly  when  the  fifteen-gallon  keg  law  was  in  operation,  and 
remember  that  in  the  small  country  town  in  which  I  was  born,  groggery  after 
groggery  was  opened  under  that  license  law,  which  are  now  entirely  closed. 

Q.    What  town  is  that  ? 

A.  The  town  of  Tewksbury.  -The  places  there  are  closed  up  now.  I  do 
not  believe  that  in  that  town  there  is  a  single  place  where  liquor  can  be 
obtained.  If  it  is  sold  at  all,  it  is  done  underhandedly,  and  to  no  consider- 
able extent.  I  am  not  as  well  acquainted  there,  however,  as  where  I  now 
live.  I  think  that  my  facilities  for  knowing  the  operations  of  the  law  are  very 
good,  from  the  fact  that  I  have  resided  In  the  country  and  done  business  in 
the  city,  remaining  here  during  the  day-time. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Do  you  think  that  this  law  of  prohibition  is 
sound  in  principle  and  expedient  and  practicable  in  its  details  and  successful 
in  its  operation  ? 

A.    I  think  it  is,  or  might  be  made  so  as  much  as  any  human  law  ? 

Q.    Do  you  think  all  the  facts  tend  to  prove  that  ? 

A.    I  do,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  any  motive  or  consideration  which  ought  to  operate 
upon  the  minds  of  this  Committee  other  than  such  facts  and  such  arguments 
as  may  be  fairly  offered,  and  such  inferences  as  by  way  of  argument  may  be 
fairly  deduced  from  those  facts  ? 

A.  I  would  have  every  influence  that  can  be  brought  to  bear  operate  upon 
this  Committee  in  favor  of  temperance. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  is  any  other  motive  which  ought  to  influence  the 
Committee,  save  such  motives  as  those  which  I  have  indicated, — regard  for 
the  facts  in  the  case  bearing  upon  the  value  and  expediency  and  wisdom  of 
the  law  itself? 

A.  I  would  add  also,  the  highest  welfare  of  the  citizens  of  this  Common- 
wealth. 

Q.  They  ought  to  be  influenced  then,  by  their  views  of  the  welfare  of  the 
Commonwealth  ? 

A.     I  think  so. 

Q.  By  their  views  of  the  wisdom  and  expediency  of  the  law  and  the 
welfare  of  the  Commonwealth  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  think  they  ought  to  be  influenced  by  anything  else  ? 

A.    I  would  bring  to  bear  every  good  influence  in  favor  of  temperance  ? 

Q.  Do  you  think  they  ought  to  be  influenced  by  anything  else  excepting 
sound  argument  and  the  facets  of  the  case  ? 

A.  I  think  that  they  should  take  the  testimony  of  a  prejudiced  rumseller, 
for  instance,  with  a  great  deal  of  caution. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  facts  which  tend  to  elicit  the  true  state  of  the 
case  are  so  difficult  of  access  that  there  is  no  danger  to  the  Committee  in 
rejecting  facts  ? 

A.    No,  sir.    I  think  the  facts  are  very  easy  of  access. 


APPENDIX.  661 

Q.    Do  you  think  it  easy  to  arrive  at  a  just  conclusion  from  the  facts  ? 

A.    I  think  it  would  not  be  if  I  was  a  member  of  this  Committee. 

Q.  That  being  so,  what  reason,  sense  or  excuse  is  there  for  the  aspersion 
in  your  testimony  of  the  character  of  other  gentlemen  who  differ  from  you 
in  opinion,  that  in  your  judgment  all  religious,  sensible  and  solid  men  think 
as  you  do. 

A.  I  said  that  in  my  judgment  the  majority  of  the  religious >  solid  men  of 
the  community  in  which  I  live  thought  as  I  do ;  and  they  do. 

Q.  Supposing  that  they  think  so,  what  right  have  you  to  attempt  to 
influence  the  Committee  in  a  matter  in  which  they  should  bring  their  own 
judgment  to  bear  independently  of  the  judgment  of  other  people,  by  attempt- 
ing to  asperse  those  who  differ  from  you  in  opinion  ?  I  understood  you  to 
say  that  in  your  judgment  nine-tenths  of  the  people  of  Massachusetts  who 
vote,  as  you  expressed  it,  "  with  the  dominant  party  "  were  in  favor  of  the 
prohibitory  law  ? 

A.     That  is  true  of  the  towns  with  which  I  am  acquainted. 

Q.    Not  then  of  the  Commonwealth,  but  only  of  a  certain  range  of  towns  ? 

A.     A  fair  sample,  however,  of  the  towns  of  the  Commonwealth. 

Q.  If  the  facts  are  accessible  and  the  reasons  are  within  easy  reach,  the 
Committee  and  the  Legislature  ought  to  be  governed  by  the  fact  and  are  in 
no  danger  of  being  misled.  What  occasion  have  you  to  go  outside  of  the 
facts  and  reasons  legitimately  bearing  upon  the  question  and  asperse  your 
neighbors  who  differ  from  you  in  opinion  ? 

A.    I  have  not  done  it. 

Q.  By  assuming  that  all  those  who  are  religious,  solid  and  respectable, 
think  with  you  ? 

A.    I  have  not  donq  any  such  thing. 

Q.     Will  you  state  what  you  meant  to  say  ? 

A.  I  meant  to  say  just  what  I  did  say,  that  the  solid,  religious,  respecta- 
ble men  in  my  own  community,  a  majority  of  them  and  a  very  large  majority 
of  them,  are  in  favor  of  this  prohibitory  law. 

Q.     Why  do  you  venture  that  opinion  ? 

A.    I  know  it  to  be  a  fact. 

Q.    What  if  it  be  a  fact? 

A.    It  ought  to  weigh  with  this  Committee,  and  I  hope  it  will. 

Q.  You  mean  to  say  you  think  the  Committee  ought  to  be  influenced  in 
their  judgment  by  your  opinion  of  your  neighbors'  opinion,  and  not  be 
governed  by  their  own  judgment  of  the  facts  of  the  case  ? 

A.  I  think  they  ought  to  be  influenced  by  the  opinion  of  sound,  solid, 
religious  men  in  the  community. 

Q.  You  come  in  as  one  of  them  and  give  your  opinion,  but  do  you  think 
the  Committee  ought  to  be  influenced  by  your  opinion  or  by  the  opinions  of 
others  ? 

A.  I  give  you  my  testimony  and  you  can  take  it  for  what  it  is  worth ;  it  is 
true. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  I  understand  you  to  say  that  in  your  opinion 
nine-tenths  of  those  who  act  in  the  dominant  party  are  in  favor  of  the  present 
law?  ' 


662  APPENDIX. 

A.    I  spoke  of  my  own  vicinity. 

Q.     You  are  acquainted  also  with  business  men  in  Boston  ? 

A.     I  am. 

Q.  Then  do  you  express  it  as  your  opinion  that  nine-tenths  of  those  who 
act  with  the  dominant  party  are  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A .  I  do  not  think  it  is  so  in  Boston.  I  think  the  liquor  interest  is  stronger 
here. 

Q.     I  do  not  ask  you  to  make  any  discrimination  as  to  place. 

A.    I  do  in  Boston. 

Q.  I  ask  you  whether  or  not  you  know  the  opinion  of  any  of  the  people 
of  Boston? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.  Taking  the  persons  that  you  know  everywhere  in  Boston  and  out  of 
Boston,  do  you  wish  to  be  understood  as  saying  that  nine-tenths  of  them  who 
act  with  the  dominant  party  are  in  favor  of  the  present  law  V 

A.    I  make  an  exception  of  Boston. 

Q.  I  do  not  ask  you  to  except  where  people  live,  or  where  they  do  busi- 
ness ;  but  I  ask  your  opinion  as  to  the  views  of  those  persons  whom  you  know, 
wherever  they  are  ? 

A.  My  belief  is  that  the  Commonwealth  is  overwhelmingly  in  favor  of  the 
prohibitory  law;  but  I  think  if  you  take  it  in  Boston  you  might  find 
opposition. 

Q.  But  the  cities  ought  to  be  counted  in  as  well  as  the  small  towns.  I 
ask  you,  taking  the  people  whom  you  know  in  all  parts  of  the  State,  what  do 
you  wish  to  give  the  Committee  as  your  opinion  of  their  sentiment — for  or 
against  the  present  law  ? 

A.  I  think  the  vast  majority  of  the  people  of  the  Commonwealth,  including 
those  of  Boston,  are  in  favor  of  it. 

Q.    What  proportion  ? 

A.  You  ask  me  a  question  that  I  cannot  well  answer.  If  you  ask  me  of 
twelve  towns  in  Middlesex  County  that  I  know  intimately,  I  can  give  you  the 
proportion.  I  will  make  a  guess  if  that  is  what  you  want. 

Q,  I  do  not  ask  you  to  give  any  opinion  in  regard  to  persons  whom  you 
do  not  know  ;  but  take  the  people  whom  you  know.  If  you  know  a  man  you 
know  him  as  well  in  one  place  as  in  another.  Take  the  people  whom  you 
know,  wherever  they  live ;  what  is  your  opinion  as  to  the  sentiment  of  those 
who  act  with  the  dominant  party  ? 

A .     Two-thirds  of  them  are  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  Taking  those  same  persons,  what  do  you  find  to  be  their  habits  in 
regard  to  the  use  of  every  kind  of  liquor  including  cider  ? 

A.  Most  of  them  are  consistent,  strong  temperance  men,  and  some  as 
strong  as  I  am  myself.  I  do  not  touch  your  wine,  beer  or  any  other  liquor. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  a  majority  of  those  who  act  with  the  dominant 
party  in  this  State  abstain  entirely  from  the  use  of  all  liquors,  including  cider 
and  beer  ? 

A.     Those  whom  I  know  intimately  do. 

Q.     Is  it  your  opinion  that  a  majority  do  ? 


APPENDIX.  663 

A,  I  always  give  the  most  favorable  construction  to  the  actions  of  my 
fellow -men  that  I  can. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  a  majority  of  them  do  in  Boston  ? 

A.     I  do.     I  hope  they  do  at  least. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  What,  in  your  opinion,  is  the  sentiment  of  the 
virtuous  and  intelligent  women  in  the  communities  in  which  you  are 
acquainted  upon  this  subject  ?  Are  they  or  not  in  favor  of  prohibition  ? 

A.  I  think  they  are  in  favor  of  prohibition.  I  do  not  know  a  woman  of 
my  acquaintance  who  is  not. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  When  you  say  that,  in  your  opinion,  the  virtuous 
and  intelligent  women  of  communities  are  in  favor  of  prohibition,  would  you 
have  us  infer  that  those  who  are  not  in  favor  of  it  are  not  virtuous  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  Yesterday  I  was  at  a  gathering  of  two  thousand  of  the  Chris- 
tian men  and  women  of  this  Commonwealth,  at  which  I  presided.  They 
passed  a  vote  without  a  single  dissenting  voice,  asking  this  Legislature  not  to 
grant  a  license  law.  The  largest  church  in  Middlesex  County  was  filled. 
The  petition,  I  suppose,  will  soon  come  before  you. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  GEORGE  MARSTON. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  have  been  the  prosecuting  officer  in  Barn- 
stable  County  for  several  years  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  in  the  southern  district  which  comprises  the  counties  of 
Barnstable,  Dukes,  Bristol  and  Nantucket. 

Q.    What  success  have  you  met  with  in  prosecuting  the  existing  law  ? 

A.  If  you  mean  by  that  to  ask  what  success  I  have  had  in  procuring  con- 
victions, I  answer  there  has  been  no  difficulty  in  doing  it  except  in  one  of  the 
recent  terms. 

Q.  What  effect  has  the  law  had  in  dimininishing  the  number  of  places 
where  liquor  is  sold  and  in  keeping  them  down  ? 

A .  In  Bristol  County,  in  New  Bedford,  Taunton  and  Fall  River,  I  have 
no  doubt  there  is  a  good  deal  of  selling ;  but  taking  the  district  as  a  whole, 
the  liquor  traffic  has  decreased  very  much. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  perfectly  practicable  to  enforce  the  law,  in  these 
places  ? 

A.    I  suppose  that  Massachusetts  can  enforce  any  law. 

Q.    Do  you  think  it  practicable  to  enforce  it  in  Boston  ?    . 

A.    It  can  be  done. 

Q.  There  has  been  a  great  deal  said  here  about  the  increase  of  intemper- 
ance. What  is  your  observation  in  regard  to  that  ? 

A.    I  think  there  has  been  a  manifest  decrease. 

Q.     Do  you  think  the  temperance  practice  and  principle  is  gaining  ground  ? 

A.  You  ask  me  about  the  increase  of  intemperance.  I  say  that  intemper- 
ance has  decreased.  I  go  no  farther  than  that.  I  do  not  know  about  the 
private  practice  and  convictions  of  the  people. 

Q.    Is  there  anything  you  would  like  to  say  upon  this  subject  further  ? 

A.  As  a  member  of  the  Legislature,  I  may  have  something  more  to  say  by 
and  by.  I  think,  at  present,  I  ought  to  go  no  further  or  be  asked  to  go  no 


664  APPENDIX. 

further  than  giving  any  facts  which  are  within  my  knowledge,  connected  with 
my  official  relation  to  the  prosecution  of  the  present  law. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  ALBERT  H.  PLUMB. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  reside  in  Chelsea  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     What  is  the  state  of  the  temperance  cause  there  ? 

A.    We  think  it  very  much  improved. 

Q.     Since  when  ? 

A .     Lately,  especially  within  the  last  year. 

^..     Do  you  think  there  is  any  real  open  sale  of  liquor  in  Chelsea  now  ? 

A.    I  do  not  think  there  is  much.     There  may  be  some. 

Q.     You  do  not  have  much  trouble  from  intemperance  there,  I  suppose  ? 

A.  We  have  had  a  great  deal.  I  find  that  the  testimony  of  families  and 
.physicians,  and  others  whom  I  meet,  is  that  the  streets  are  a  great  deal  more 
quiet,  and  that  the  neighborhoods  where  the  lower  class  of  people  live  who 
used  to  have  frequent  drunken  brawls,  are  more  quiet  now.  The  sale  of 
liquor  is  not  to  be  had,  and  there  is  not  so  much  noise  as  formerly.  Neighbor- 
hoods that  were  formerly  very  troublesome,  are  quiet  and  peaceable  now. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  know  what  is  the  practice  of  the  churches  within  your 
observation,  whether  the  habits  of  persons  in  regard  to  the  use  of  liquor  are 
taken  into  consideration  when  they  are  proposed  for  admission  into  the 
church  ? 

A .     I  think  it  is. 

Q.  Is  there  a  strict  rule  about  that  in  your  church  or  any  other  churches 
that  you  are  aware  of? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  there  is  any  rule.  The  point  always  aimed  at  by 
the  examining  committee,  I  suppose,  is  to  ask  such  practical  questions  as  in 
their  judgment  will  bring  out  the  fact  as  to  their  moral  and  religious  charac- 
ters. I  think  it  would  be  a  bar  to  the  admission  of  any  man  if  he  were  known 
to  be  an  habitual  user,  although  he  were  never  known  to  drink  to  excess. 

Q.     Is  that  true  of  other  churches  besides  your  own  ? 

A.     I  think  it  is,  sir. 

Q.  Suppose  a  liquor-dealer  should  be  proposed  for  admission,  what  would 
be  the  result  ? 

A.    I  never  heard  of  such  a  case.    I  do  not  think  it  one  very  likely 
occur.     I  do  not  think   there  would   be   any  difference  of  opinion   amonfe 
Christians  with  whom  I  am  acquainted,  not  but  that  there  may  be  some 
liquor-dealers  very  gentlemanly  and  pleasant  neighbors  ;  but  I  am  not  aware 
that  they  commonly  make  pretensions  to  religious  character. 

Q.  Is  it  not  the  universal  judgment  of  the  church  with  which  you  are  con- 
nected or  acquainted,  so  far  as  you  know  and  believe,  that  a  man  who  habitu- 
ally engages  in  the  traffic  of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  beverage,  is  unsuited  for 
the  church,  that  he  is  in  an  immoral  and  bad  business  ? 

A.  That  is  my  own  opinion,  and  I  think  it  is  the  opinion  very  generally 
among  Christian  people  of  all  denominations. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  You  have  a  sort  of  common  law,  I  suppose,  which 
is  not  expressed  in  written  rule  ? 


APPENDIX.  665 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  the  opinions  you  have  expressed  in  reference  to  the  judgment 
and  practice  and  discipline  of  the  church  is  based  upon  that  unwritten  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  it  is  made  up  from  precedent. 

Q.  Do  you  desire  that  the  State  should  be  more  rigid  in  its  written  law 
than  the  church  in  this  respect  ? 

A.  The  State  is  called  upon  to  regard  public  morality  in  a  way  that  the 
church  is  not. 

Q.     Is  that  your  idea  of  the  relative  office  of  the.  Church  and  State  ? 

A.     The  government  assumes  responsibilities  that  the  church  does  not. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  it  is  any  part  of  the  office  of  the  State  in  this 
country  to  guard  morality  by  criminal  laws — that  it  is  any  part  of  the  duty  or 
right  of  the  State  in  this  country  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  that  is  my  opinion,  that  the  State  is  to  endeavor  to  guard  the 
interests  of  morality.  Tfre  State  passes  laws  against  crime,  not  only  against 
those  who  steal  but  against  those  who  receive  stolen  goods ;  and  I  suppose  that 
our  present  prohibitory  law  is  very  similar  to  that.  The  State  does  not  expect 
to  suppress  thieving  altogether,  or  the  sale  of  liquor,  but  we  can  do  a  great 
deal  of  legislation  in  such  suppression,  if,  in  the  sentiment  of  the  Christian 
Commonwealth,  such  acts  are  considered  offences  against  good  morals. 

Adjourned. 

84 


666  APPENDIX. 


NINETEENTH    DAY. 

FRIDAY,  March  22, 1867. 

The  Committee  met  at .9  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  the  hearing  of  testimony  was 
resumed. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  ROLAND  G.  USHER. 
Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     You  are  Mayor  of  Lynn,  I  believe  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Is  this  your  first  year  in  office  ? 

A .     Second  year. 

Q.  The  question  before  the  Committee  is,  mainly,  the  expediency  of  pro- 
hibiting or  licensing  the  sale  of  liquors  as  beverages.  We  would  like,  very 
briefly,  your  opinion,  and  any  facts  you  may  be  called  upon  to  state  in  con- 
nection therewith. 

A.  I  am  opposed  to  any  change  in  the  law  at  present.  So  far,  the  State 
Constabulary  have  been  successful  in  all  their  attempts  to  enforce  the  law  in 
our  city. 

Q.  Do  you  perceive  the  result  of  their  efforts  in  the  state  of  the  traffic  in 
your  city  ? 

A.  I  think  I  do,  sir.  I  think  there  is  less  drunkenness  in  Lynn  than  ever 
before  since  my  remembrance. 

Q.  Is  the  sentiment  of  the  leading  men  of  your  city  favorable,  in  your 
judgment,  to  the  continuance  of  the  law  ? 

A.     I  should  say  that  it  was — a  majority. 

Q.     Is  the  traffic  as  open  in  your  place  as  formerly  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  think  not.  I  do  not  think  there  is  an  open  bar  in  the  city  of 
Lynn  to-day. 

Q.     Whatever  sale  there  is,  is  clandestine,  secret  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  your  judgment,  has  the  number  of  such  places  increased  or  dimin- 
ished? 

A.     They  have  been  diminished  recently,  sir. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  as  to  the  prevalence  of  intemperance,  as  com- 
pared with  former  periods  ? 

A.  I  believe,  as  I  said  before,  that  there  is  less  drunkenness  to-day  in  the 
city  of  Lynn  than  there  has  been  since  my  remembrance. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     Are  you  a  native  of  Lynn  ? 

A.     I  have  resided  there  since  I  was  nine  years  of  age. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     There  is  intemperance  in  Lynn,  as  in  other  places  ? 

A.     Oh,  yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  as  to  the  fact  whether  or  not  there  are  secret 
places  where  liquor  is  sold  ? 


APPENDIX.  667 

A.     Only  from  report. 

Q.    Are  there  reports  to  that  effect  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir.    It  is  the  impression  that  there  are. 

Q.     But  how  extensive  these  are,  you  cannot  tell  V 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    You  have  arrests  for  drunkenness,  I  suppose  V 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  have  reports  of  these,  daily  or  weekly  ? 

A.    We  have  them  monthly. 

Q.  Have  you  made  any  comparison  between  your  monthly  reports  now? 
and  two  years  ago  ? 

A.  I  have  not,  myself.  I  gave  that  to  some  officer  of  the  State,  who 
called  upon  me  for  it. 

Q.  Are  there  any  of  these  secret  clubs  of  young  men  in  Lynn  where  they 
buy  liquor  by  the  quantity,  and  resort  to  these  places  to  drink  it  ? 

A.     There  are  said  to  be. 

Q.    Do  you  know  how  extensive  those  are  ? 

A.     No,  sir,  not  from  personal  knowledge. 

Q.  Then,  whether  there  is  more  or  less  liquor  drank  now  than  four  months 
ago  or  two  years  ago,  you  have  no  means  of  telling  ? 

A.  Only  so  far  as  my  observation  goes.  In  passing  through  the  city,  I  see 
there  is  less  apparent  drunkenness  than  ever  before. 

Q.  My  question  was  whether  you  had  any  means  of  telling  whether  there 
was  more  or  less  liquor  drank  now  than  two  years  ago,  or  at  previous 
periods  ?  You  do  not  know,  I  suppose  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  do  not. 

Q.    If  there  is  secret  drinking,  you  do  not  know  how  much  is  drank  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  do  not. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  what  is  called  temperate  drinking  is  more  or 
less  than  it  used  to  be  ? 

A.    I  do  not. 

Q.  You  are,  then,  unable  to  form  any  opinion  whether  the  consumption 
of  liquor  as  a  beverage,  by  all  classes  in  Lynn,  is  less  or  more  than  formerly  ? 

A.     Only  by  general  observation. 

Q.  I  do  not  suppose  your  general  observation  could  indicate  every  person 
who  drank  a  glass  of  wine  in  an  evening  meeting  of  one  of  those  clubs,  would 
it? 

A.    I  am  unable  to  say. 

Q.  You  say  there  are  no  open  bars  in  Lynn.  Do  you  know  whether  the 
expressmen,  and  other  common  carriers,  do  any  business  in  the  way  of  carry- 
ing liquor  to  Lynn  and  other  places  ? 

A.    Not  from  personal  knowledge. 

Q.  The  amount  of  your  testimony,  then,  is,  if  I  understand  it  rightly,  that 
the  open  places  have  been  chiefly  closed  in  Lynn  ? 

A.    I  do  not  think  there  is  an  open  bar  in  the  city  of  Lynn. 

Q.     And  you  think  you  see  less  drunkenness  in  the  streets  than  formerly  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 


668  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Whether  there  is  more  or  less  drinking  in  secret  now  than  heretofore, 
you  have  no  means  of  judging  ? 

A.    I  am  unable  to  say  whether  there  is  more  or  less. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Have  the  clubs  which  you  say  exist  in  Lynn  been 
the  growth  of  the  last  few  months,  or  the  last  year  or  two,  or  are  they  a  pecu- 
liarity, somewhat,  of  the  shoe  men  ? 

A.  There  have  been  more  or  less  club-rooms  set  up  in  Lynn,  for  the  last 
ten  or  eleven  years. 

Q.  Is  it  true  that  the  manufacturers  and  the  shoemakers  have  their 
respective  clubs, — classifying  themselves  somewhat  in  clubs  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  that  is  so. 

Q.    But  there  have  been  clubs  among  the  shoe  men  for  several  years  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Are  you  aware  that  they  are  drinking  places  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  do  not  think  they  are,  so  much  as  has  been  represented. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  The  clubs  I  referred  to  you  said  you  did  not  know 
anything  about ;  but  I  inquired  whether  you  had  understood  that  there  were 
any  of  those  clubs  which  were  drinking  clubs  ? 

A.  When  you  ask  me  to  give  my  opinion,  I  will  do  so ;  but  I  cannot  say 
how  much  liquor  is  drank. 

Q.     You  said  they  were  drinking  clubs. 

A.    No,  sir,  I  did  not  say  they  were  for  drinking.     I  take  it  back,  if  I  did. 

Q.  The  question  put  to  you  was,  whether  there  had  not  sprung  up  clubs 
of  young  men  who  met  in  private  places,  procured  liquor,  in  quantities  greater 
or  smaller,  which  they  kept  there,  and  then  resorted  there  to  drink  it.  What 
is  you  answer  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  of  any  club-room  that  is  formed  with  the  special  idea  of 
using  it  as  a  drinking  club. 

Q.    Is  it  reported  that  there  are  such  ? 
A.    I  have  heard  so. 

Q.    And  is  it  reported  that  these  have  increased  within  the  last  year  ? 
A.    I  should  say  that  it  had  been  reported  so,  although  I  am  not  certain. 
I  think  the  impression  is,  that  they  have  increased,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do-  you  mean,  in  the  number  of  clubs,  or  in  the 
membership  ? 

A.    In  the  number  of  clubs,  I  should  say  the  impression  was. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  CHARLES  A.  DEWEY. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  MINER.)    You  are  Judge  of  the  Police  Court  of  Milford  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  held  that  office  ? 

A.  I  have  held  that  office  three  years,  but  was  Trial  Justice  before.  I 
have  held  the  office  of  Trial  Justice  and  Judge  of  the  Police  Court  for  the 
last  six  years. 

Q.    Were  you  acquainted  with  Judge  Dewey,  of  the  Supreme  Court  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir  ;  he  was  my  father. 

Q.  Will  you  state  the  results  of  your  observations  as  bearing  upon  the 
question  before  us  ? 


APPENDIX.  ,    669 

A.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  prohibitory  law  has  never  been  so  well  enforced 
before  as  it  has  been  during  the  last  six  months  or  so. 

Q.  Do  you  perceive  any  results  of  that  enforcement  in  the  condition  of 
the  traffic,  and  the  state  of  the  cause  of  temperance  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  think  that  it  has  changed  my  opinion  somewhat,  with 
regard  to  the  practicability  of  the  enforcement  of  the  prohibitory  law.  I 
think  that  it  could  be  enforced  under  the  present  system.  The  present  Con- 
stabulary system  seems  to  me  to  have  aided  very  much  in  the  enforcement  of 
the  law. 

Q.  You  say  it  has  changed  your  opinion.  You  formerly  had  less  confi- 
dence in  the  practicability  of  its  enforcement  ? 

A.  I  think  it  can  be  enforced  much  more  easily  and  efficiently  through  a 
State  Constabulary  force  than  it  could  under  the  former  system  of  State  Con- 
stables. 

Q.  Do  you  find  anything  in  the  mode  of  election  of  town  officers  and 
municipal  officers  which  tends  to  inefficiency  in  the  enforcement .  of  local 
criminal  law  ? 

A.  It  seems  to  tend  very  strongly  in  that  way,  that  is,  in  the  town  of 
Milford.  Officers  who  did  their  duty  and  enforced  the  law  became  unpopu- 
lar, and  were  turned  out  of  office. 

Q.  Milford  has  had  the  reputation,  I  believe,  of  being  what  would  be  com- 
monly called  "  a  hard  place  "  in  regard  to  drinking  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir  ;  it  has  a  very  large  foreign  population. 

Q.    Has  it  materially  changed  in  that  respect  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  it  has,  materially.  There  is  still  considerable  sell- 
ing, and  considerable  drinking.  I  suppose  it  cannot  be  entirely  prevented  by 
any  law  among  the  foreign  population,  which  consists  principally  of  Irish,  and 
they  will  sell  and  will  drink. 

Q.    What  is  the  state  of  open  drinking  in  Milford  ? 

A.    I  think  that  is  suppressed.     There  is  no  open  bar  there. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  as  to  the  fact  that  the  amount  used  there  has 
much  decreased  ? 

A.  I  think  it  has  considerably  decreased.  There  have  been  several 
seizures  made  there  of  liquor,  one  to  a  very  large  amount,  about  as  large  as 
any  in  the  State. 

Q.     How  large  ? 

A.  About  $5,000,  or  a  little  over  that.  Appeals  have  been  taken  in  all 
these  cases.  That  case  was  carried  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  State  and 
sustained  by  them.  I  believe  it  has  now  gone  up  to  the  United  States  Court. 
Perhaps  I  should  say  that  it  seems  to  me  the  law  could  be  enforced  much 
better,  provided  that  these  legal  questions  which  have  been  raised  should  be 
finally  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States.  That  has  been 
one  of  the  great  obstacles  in  the  enforcement  of  the  law — the  uncertainty  in 
regard  to  the  decisions  of  these  legal  questions. 

Q.    You  understand  that  these  questions  are  substantially  decided  ? 

A.  I  believe  they  are  now ;  and  I  think  that  those  who  sell  liquor  begin  to 
feel  that  they  are  decided  against  them. 


670   .  APPENDIX. 

Q.  So  that  you  feel  that  we  are,  in  a  legal  point  of  view,  approaching  the 
hour  when  we  may  expect  far  greater  results  from  the  execution  of  the  law  ? 

A.     I  think  so. 

Q.     Is  there  any  other  fact  you  would  like  to  state  ? 

A.     I  don't  know  that  there  is  any  other. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Judge  Dewey,  although  the  open  bars  are  closed  in 
Milford,  is  the  sale  of  liquor  to  be  drank  common  there  ? 

A.    I  suppose  there  is  considerable  sold  there  yet,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  any  means  of  judging  whether  the  amount  sold  for  use  has 
diminished  since  the  closing  of  the  public  bars  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  that  I  could  say  I  have  the  means  of  judging.  I  only 
know  that  those  who  do  sell  have  a  very  small  quantity  of  liquor  on  hand. 

Q.  When  the  State  Constables  are  about,  I  suppose  they  don't  mean  to 
have  a  great  deal  on  hand  ? 

A.     No,  sir,  I  suppose  not.    I  stated  before  that  I  thought  it  had  diminished. 

Q.  Have  you  any  accurate  means  of  forming  an  opinion,  whether  it  has  or 
not  ?  Have  you  any  facts  or  is  it  a  matter  of  opinion  from  ordinary 
observation  ? 

A.  There  is  less  liquor  to  be  found  at  those  places,  at  many  places,  hardly 
any,  where  formerly  there  was  a  great  deal. 

Q.  You  would  expect,  when  prosecutions  were  going  on  and  the  places 
closed,  that  the  sales  would  be  secret,  if  made  at  all  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  any  facts,  from  which  you  can  form  an  opinion,  that  the 
amount  of  sales,  open  and  secret  together,  are  now  less  than  they  were  when 
they  were  all  open  ? 

A.    I  should -think  they  must  be. 

Q.     Have  you  any  facts  ? 

A.    I  think  there  is  less  drunkenness  there. 

Q.  You  say  your  opinion  has  changed  in  regard  to  the  administration  of 
the  law.  Until  recently,  was  it  ever  enforced  at  all  in  Milford,  to  amount  to 
anything  V 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  ago  ? 

A.  It  has  been  for  a  number  of  years.  It  depended  entirely  upon  the 
officers  elected  by  the  town.  If  they  elected  efficient  constables,  who  were 
disposed  to  enforce  it,  it  would  be  enforced.  Some  years  they  would  enforce 
it,  and  some  years  they  would  not. 

Q.  Was  there  ever  anything  like  an  efficient  enforcement  of  the  law 
before  ? 

A .    It  has  been  enforced  much  more  efficiently  under  the  present  system. 

Q.     Before  that,  was  its  enforcement  worthy  to  be  called  efficient  ? 

A.    Well,  at  times ;  but  still  it  was  not  very  vigorously  enforced. 

Q.  There  would  be  times  when  there  would  be  a  movement,  and  the 
liquor-shops  would  be  apparently  closed  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Then  there  would  come  times  when  the  enforcement  was  inefficient, 
and  the  liquor-shops  would  be  opened  again  ? 


APPENDIX.  671 

A.    Yes,  sir.     They  would  sell  openly  for  a  long  time. 

Q.  There  have  been  these  changes,  up  and  down,  for  a  long  period  of 
time? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  While  the  prohibitory  law  is  enforced  upon  the  lower  and  the  smaller 
places,  and  the  large  hotels  are  not  meddled  with  at  all,  can  there,  in  that- 
state  of  things,  be  any  efficient  enforcement  of  the  law  for  any  length  of 
time  ? 

A.  I  think  it  can  be  enforced  to  a  great  extent.  It  seems  to  me  that  the 
sale  of  intoxicating  liquor  could  be  prevented  in  those  places  a  great  deal 
easier  than  it  could  in  the  low  grog-shops. 

Q.  Take  one  of  the  large  importing  houses  in  Boston  who  sell  liquor  to 
everybody,  in  great  or  small  quantities.  If  there  should  be  no  attempt  to 
enforce  it  there,  will  any  attempt  to  enforce  it  upon  the  lower  or  smaller  places 
continue  to  have  any  perceptible  effect  after  a  few  months  ? 

A.  I  think  it  would  have  considerable  effect,  though  I  do  not  think  the 
selling  could  be  entirely  prohibited  among  the  lower  classes. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  selling  could  be  entirely  prohibited  anywhere,  lower 
or  higher  ? 

A.  I  think  it  might  be,  as  I  said  before,  in  the  higher  classes.  If  the 
Legislature  are  determined  to  enforce  the  prohibitory  law,  I  think  that  in 
time  they  will  enforce  it,  as  far  as  the  heaviest  of  it  is  concerned. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  in  the  higher  classes  you  will  ever  get  it  so  they 
cannot  buy  "rum  ? 

A .     I  speak  of  the  higher  classes  of  liquor-sellers. 

Q.  So  long  as  a  portion  of  the  community  who  come  under  the  denomina- 
tion of  respectable  and  higher  classes,  (I  use  the  term  "  higher  classes  "  only 
to  indicate  what  I  mean,  for  I  do  not  believe  much  in  classes,)  so  long  as  they 
are  in  the  habit  of  constantly  using,  to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  wine,  do  you 
believe  it  can  be  enforced  ?  Do  you  believe  you  can  prevent  the  sale  of  it  to 
that  class  of  men  by  any  means  ? 

A.     Not  entirely. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  in  the  county  of  Worcester  you  can  enforce  the 
cider  clause,  so  long  as  the  farmers  make  cider  and  use  it,  and  sell  some  of  it, 
and  drink  it  when  it  is  sweet  ? 

A .     I  should  think  it  could  be. 

Q.     Have  you  ever  had  a  prosecution  in  your  court  for  selling  cider  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Well,  how  would  it  be  in  the  interior — the  farming  towns  ? 

A.    I  cannot  judge  very  well  of  that. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  you  could  prevent  the  sale  by  one  farmer  to 
another  of  a  barrel  of  cider  that  he  had  made  in  his  cider-press  ? 

A.  I  don't  know  that  I  could  say  about  that.  I  have  not  the  means  of 
judging. 

Q.  If  I  understand,  then,  the  amount  of  your  opinion  is,  that  with  the 
lower  classes,  the  sale  would  not,  by  any  law,  be  entirely  stopped,  and  that  the 
sale  to  the  higher  classes  will  never,  by  any  prohibitory  law,  be  entirely  sup- 
pressed. If  tli at  is  to  be  the  state  of  facts,  and  there  could  be  a  system 


672  APPEN7DIX. 

devised  that  would  restrain  the  sale  of  liquors  to  both  the  higher  and  lower 
classes,  as  much  as,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  the  prohibitory  law  would  restrain  it, 
would  it  not  be  better  to  have  such  a  law  than  to  have  a  prohibitory  law,  that 
is  so  extensively  violated,  or  violated  constantly,  more  or  less  ? 

A.    I  don't  know  how  it  could  be  done  under  any  other  law. 

Q.  That  is  not  the  question.  You  have  given  the  fact,  that  there  always 
will  be  sales  to  the  higher  and  lower  classes,  under  the  prohibitory  law. 
These  sales,  of  course,  are  constant  violations  of  this  law.  Now,  if  there 
could  be  any  arrangement  provided  by  which  that  necessary  sale,  if  you 
please  to  call  it  so,  (necessary,  because  it  always  will  be,)  can  be  supplied 
according  to  law,  and  restrained  there,  would  it  not  be  better  than  to  have  it 
sold  in  violation  of  law  constantly  ? 

A,    I  think  not,  sir. 

Q.  We  know  there  are  all  kinds  of  laws  that  are  more  or  less  broken,  but 
is  it  not,  in  principle,  an  evil  to  have  a  law,  highly  criminal,  severe  in  its 
penalties,  with  the  common  understanding,  by  everybody,  that  that  law  is  to 
be  violated,  more  or  less  ? 

A .    I  think  it  is  an  evil,  in  some  respects ;  it  may  be  counterbalanced. 

Q.  But  it  is  an  evil  bearing  upon  the  force  of  law,  and  the  respect  of  the 
people  for  law,  is  it  not  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir.    I  think  it  gives  rise  to  a  great  deal  of  perjury. 

Q.  But  does  it  not  lessen  the  sense  of  obligation  on  the  part  of  the  commu- 
nity, however  intelligent  and  however  upright,  to  obey  law,  when  it  is 
expected,  by  all  who  support  it,  that  it  will  be  more  or  less  violated  ? 

A.     Somewhat  so. 

Q.  Suppose  it  was  the  common  sentiment  that  the  law  could  not  be 
enforced  against  stealing,  what  would  be  the  effect  of  that  upon  the  preva- 
lence of  stealing  ? 

A.    It  would  be  somewhat  the  same. 

Q.  It  is,  then,  an  evil  to  have  any  law,  highly  criminal  in  its  penalties, 
stand  upon  the  statute  book,  with  the  common  understanding  by  everybody 
that  it  cannot  be  enforced  ? 

A.     Certainly,  if  there  is  such  an  understanding. 

Q.  In  your  observation,  does  not  the  greatest  evil  come  from  the  open  sale 
of  liquor  by  the  glass,  in  stores,  cellars,  bars,  and  everywhere  else  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  the  greatest  evil  comes  from  that  mode  of  selling. 

Q.  Has  not  the  selling  in  saloons,  at  bars,  and  other  places  where  they  sell 
by  the  glass,  been  the  most  prolific  cause  of  intemperance,  in  your  opinion  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  I  should  think  so. 

Q.  Now,  if  those  sales  by  the  glass,  to  be  drank  at  the  time  and  place, 
could  be  entirely  broken  up,  and  at  the  same  time  a  well  restricted  regulation 
established,  that  would  furnish  it  to  the  people  in  the  higher  walks,  who  you 
say  always  will  get  it,  would  it  not  be  better  than  a  general  restriction,  with 
constant  violations  ?  Without  a  general  prohibitory  law,  could  not  the  bars 
be  broken  up,  and  drinking  on  the  premises  ? 

A.  It  might,  to  some  extent,  but  it  seems  to  me  this  is  a  more  efficient 
law,  and  one  that  is  better  for  all  persons. 


APPENDIX.  673 

Q.  The  State  Constabulary  being  retained,  what  difficulty  would  there 
be  in  breaking  up  the  sale  by  the  glass,  under  a  law  that  forbids  that, 
although  the  same  law  might  permit  the  sale  by  druggists  for  medicine,  and 
the  sale  to  families  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  that  a  great  deal  could  be  accomplished  by  a  good 
license  law,  but  it  seems  to  me  the  other  would  be  more  effective. 

Q.  Would  it  not  depend  upon  which  was  the  most  thoroughly  executed, 
whether  the  one  or  the  other  would  be  more  effective  ?  In  other  words, 
would  not  a  license  law,  thoroughly  carried  out  according  to  the  terms  of  the 
law,  be  more  effective  than  a  broader  law,  not  executed  ? 

A.     Very  possibly. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  In  your  judgment  that  there  probably  would  be 
some  sale  of  liquors  as  beverages  under  the  best  execution  of  the  law,  do  you 
mean  to  draw  a  very  marked  distinction  between  such  crimes  and  other 
crimes  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  This  law  is  not  so  well  enforced  as  some  others ;  probably 
cannot  be  so  well  enforced  as  some  other  laws. 

Q.  But  your  judgment  is,  that  this  law  would  be  far  more  efficient, 
honestly  executed,  than  any  license  law  possibly  could  be,  in  extinguishing 
the  evils  of  intemperance  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  think  there  are  many  persons  who  will  sell,  whatever  may 
be  the  law. 

Q.  Which,  in  your  judgment,  is  a  greater  detriment  to  the  moral  sense  of 
the  community,  a  good  law  violated,  or  a  bad  law,  embodying  a  falsehood, 
that  should  be  obeyed  ? 

A.  I  think  that  we  ought  to  have  good  laws,  and  that  they  ought  to  be 
enforced.  It  has  always  seemed  to  me  that  it  was  an  objection  to  the  law, 
that  it  caused  so  much  perjury  ;  there  is  a  vast  amount  of  it  committed  con- 
stantly in  the  Commonwealth ;  and  yet,  notwithstanding  the  evils,  it  seems  to 
me  that  it  is  a  good  law,  and  ought  to  be  enforced. 

Q.  And  you  think  that  the  evils  that  would  grow  out  of  a  law  that  should 
license  an  act  as  for  the  public  good,  which  would  be  a  public  evil,  would  be 
greater  than  those  that  exist  under  the  present  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  regard  these  evils  as  necessarily  connected  with  this  law,  any 
more  than  with  other  criminal  laws  ? 

A.  I  think  there  would  be  more  evils  actually  connected  with  it,  in 
practice. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  this  law  being  the  "  cause  "  of  perjury.  Strictly  speak- 
ing, does  it  not  rather  furnish  the  occasion  ? 

A.     It  furnishes  the  occasion. 

Q.     Do  not  all  criminal  laws  furnish  like  occasion  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  to  some  extent. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  in  regard  to  the  enforcement  of  license  laws, 
as  connected  with  this  disposition  on  the  part  of  witnesses  to  perjure  them- 
selves ? 

A.    No,  sir;  I  have  not. 
85 


674  APPENDIX. 

Q.  In  view  of  the  questions  that  will  arise  under  the  license  law,  as  to 
whether  liquor  is  drank  on  the  premises  where  it  is  authorized  to  be  sold  to 
be  carried  away,  lead  to  a  complication  of  difficulties  that  does  not  pertain  to 
the  existing  law  ? 

A.  Perhaps  so.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquor  might 
be  more  effectually  prevented  by  the  prohibitory  law  than  by  a  license  law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  Did  you  not  once  reside  in  one  of  the  Western 
States  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Which  one? 

A .    Iowa. 

Q.    Do  you  know  whether  they  had  a  license  law  there  ? 

A.  I  think  they  did  not.  I  never  heard  of  any  license  law  at  that  time. 
They  sold  openly,  and  very  freely.  There  was  a  large  German  population 
there,  who  were  constantly  drinking  beer. 

Q.  Were  the  drinking  habits  of  society  in  Iowa,  among  all  classes,  more 
general  than  here  ? 

A.     All  classes  seemed  to  drink  much  more. 

Q.    Was  not  intemperance  more  general  among  all  classes  there  than  here  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  as  I  could  say  about  that.    I  do  not  think  I  saw  more. 

Q.  (By  the  CHAIRMAN.)  As  a  matter  of  legislation,  do  I  understand  you 
to  say  you  are  in  favor  of  the  principle  of  the  present  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  ALBERT  II.  PLUMB  (recalled.) 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  I  learn  that  you  have  lived  in  New  York  previ- 
ously to  coming  to  Chelsea  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  ago  ? 

A.  I  was  always  a  resident  of  Western  New  York,  in  Buffalo  and  that 
county,  until  eight  years  ago. 

Q.     They  had  license  laws  in  existence  there  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Did  the  license  law  then  operate  to  suppress  or  restrain  the  traffic  to 
any  appreciable  extent  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  it  did.  It  was  found  by  experience  that  it  was  very 
difficult  to  prevent  any  kind  of  application  for  a  license  being  granted. 

Q.  Any  one,  as  a  general  thing,  could  get  a  license,  whatever  his  character 
might  be  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  The  law  was  thought  to  be  very  stringent  in  its  requirements. 
The  citizens  of  the  town  must  certify  to  the  good  moral  character  of  the 
applicant, — persons  in  office,  individuals  personally  acquainted  with  the  appli- 
cant, his  neighbors  ;  but  in  practice,  that  was  worthless.  I  remember  a  case  in 
which  tlie  Supervisior  of  the  town  and  the  Justice  of  the  Peace,  both  on  the 
Board  of  Excise,  and  one  or  both  members  of  the  church,  certified  to  the  good 
moral  character  of  a  man  whom  they  had  within  a  month  discharged  from  a 
mill  in  which  they  were  engaged  at  that  time,  as  an  incorrigible  thief.  He  had 
for  .a  .long  dine  continued  his  depredations  upon  their  property,  until  they 


APPENDIX. 

turned  him  out,  for  that  reason  and  no  other,  and  then  certified  to  his  good 
moral  character !  It  was  considered  a  mere  form,  and  amounted  to  nothing. 
There  was  at  one  time  an  effort  made  to  change  the  law,  and  the  Legislature 
gave  the  towns  permission  to  refuse  licenses,  if  they  pleased.  Every  town 
was  called  upon  to  vote  on  that  question ;  great  efforts  were  made  by  temper- 
ance men  to  influence  public  sentiment,  and  the  towns  very  generally  refused 
to  grant  licens.es.  But  there  was  no  sufficient  penalty  for  selling  without  a 
license,  and  there  was  great  difficulty  in  procuring  convictions.  They  had 
no  State  Police,  and  it  was  a  matter  in  which  neighbors  were  very  reluctant 
to  move.  And  it  was  very  difficult  even  to  secure  an  unprejudiced  and  fair 
vote  on  the  subject.  The  people  of  one  town,  I  have  no  doubt,  would  feel 
very  much  stronger  in  their  refusal  to  license  if  they  were  backed  up  by 
neighboring  towns,  and  by  the  judgment  of  a  large  Commonwealth.  It  did 
not  work  well  with  us. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  The  real  trouble  was  in  the  disinclination  of  the 
people  and  their  officers  to  carry  out  the  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Was  that  disinclination  on  the  part  of  the  people  and  the  men  they 
put  in  power  any  fault  of  the  law  ? 

A.     I  think  it  was,  in  part,  sir. 

Q.  You  say  that  this  member  of  the  church  made  a  false  certificate,  Do 
you  think  the  law  had  any  influence  in  making  him  give  that  false  certificate  ? 

A.  Perhaps  not,  sir ;  but  that  fact  was  adduced  to  show  that  a  license  law, 
however  stringent,  unless  accompanied  by  very  heavy  penalties,  was  not 
effectual  in  restraining  the  sale. 

Q.  How  did  the  insufficient  penalty  of  the  law  tend  to  create  a  disposition 
on  the  part  of  that  church-member  to  make  a  false  certificate  ? 

A.     I  don't  know  that  he  was  influenced  by  that. 

Q.  Really,  had  the  law  anything  to  do  with  that  ?  Was  not  the  fault  in 
the  people — in  the  men  whose  duty  it  was  to  execute  it,  and  in  the  people 
who  put  them  in  power  ? 

A.  Very  likely,  if  there  had  been  good  men  elected,  they  would  have 
done  differently. 

Q.  Do  you  expect  that  any  law  will  be  executed  unless  it  is  sustained  by 
the  better  judgment  of  the  better  class  of  the*  community  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  suppose  not,  largely. 

Q.  Then,  after  all,  does  not  this  question  as  to  which  law  will  operate  best, 
a  prohibitory  or  a  license  law,  depend  upon  the  public  sentiment  and  the 
disposition  of  the  community  to  execute  one  law  or  the  other  ? 

A.  It  depends,  also,  I  judge,  upon  the  opinion  of  the  people,  the  better 
class  of  people,  as  to  the  righteousness  of  the  law.  There  was  a  difficulty  in 
respect  to  the  license  law.  Good  people  said  it  brought  them  into  a  moral 
responsibility ;  that  they  were  responsible  for  sanctioning  a  trade  which  they 
looked  upon  as  no  better  than  piracy ;  and  they  felt  that  a  law  which  did  not 
give  a  sanction  and  license  and  permission  to  immorality,  would  be  better 
sustained  by  the  hearty  feeling  of  the  good  people  of  the  Commonwealth. 

Q.  Well,  they  believed  that  as  far  as  the  license  law  was  executed,  and  as  far 
as  it  prevented  drinking  and  intemperance,  the  effect  was  good,  did  they  not  ? 


676  APPENDIX. 

A.  They  might  have  thought  the  effect  was  good,  and  yet  the  law  not 
good.  The  law  was  bad  in  principle. 

Q.  Then  because  there  was  some  principle  in  the  law  that  they  did  not 
like,  they  would  not  avail  themselves  of  what  was  good  in  it  to  accomplish  a 
good  result  ?  Do  you  mean  that  ? 

A.     They  did  avail  themselves  of  it  as  far  as  they  could. 

Q.  Exactly.  But  you  say  one  church-member  made  a  false  certificate, 
and  put  a  miserable  fellow  into  the  business  ? 

A.     That  was  one  fact,  and  was  adduced  for  another  purpose.  >» 

Q.  I  want  the  bearing  of  that  fact  upon  your  conclusion.  You  say  you 
brought  that  up  as  an  evil  of  the  license  law.  Do  you  really  think  that  illus- 
trates the  evil  of  a  license  law  at  all  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  I  do. 

Q.    What  evil  of  a  license  law  does  that  illustrate  ? 

A.     The  inefficiency  of  it. 

Q.  Wherein  does  its  inefficiency  consist — in  its  provisions,  or  in  the  fact 
that  proper  men  will  not  execute  it  ? 

A.  The  difficulty  in  that  case  was  that  the  individuals  were  not  inclined 
to  enforce  the  law ;  but  supposing  they  had  been, — get  a  law  with  all  the 
stringent  regulations  that  you  please,  and  it  will  not  be  as  effectual  as  a  plain, 
straight-forward  prohibition.  There  is  the  fault  in  the  license  law — it  is  inef- 
fectual because  it  does  not  positively  prohibit;  it  leaves  to  the  judgment  of 
men  the  question  of  granting  licenses,  which  is  affected  by  many  considera- 
tions calculated  to  bias  and  prejudice  them.  And,  furthermore,  it  leaves  the 
question  as  to  the  fitness  of  applicants,  as  to  whether  they  belong  to  the  per- 
mitted class,  to  the  judgment  of  individuals  in  their  neighborhood,  who  are 
liable  to  be  biased  by  many  considerations,  as  was  the  fact  in  the  case  I  have 
mentioned. 

Q.  Would  these  men  who  gave  that  certificate  have  convicted  a  man  for 
being  drunk  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir,  I  think  they  would. 

Q.  Are  you  sure  about  that  ?  In  a  community  that  administers  a  law  in 
that  way  by  its  officials,  is  there  any  such  public  sentiment  as  would  execute 
any  law  ? 

A.     Oh,  yes,  sir. 

Q.     This  law  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  I  think  so. 

Q.    This  law,  without  a  public  sentiment,  can  be  executed,  can  it  ? 

A.  Public  sentiment  works  a  great  deal  more  easily,  and  with  less  friction, 
in  favor  of  a  law  which  is  sweeping  in  its  prohibition,  and  which  is  sustained 
as  a  uniform  principle,  by  the  united  judgment  of  the  community. 

Q.  You  think  that  a  community  who  will  not  avail  themselves  of  the  good 
qualities  of  a  license  law,  because  there  is  evil  in  it,  will  execute  the  other  ? 

A.  A  great  portion  of  the  community, — the  better  portion, — availed  them- 
selves of  the  good  there  was  in  the  license  law. 

Q.  Then  you  think  the  effect  of  these  laws  depends  upon  the  correct 
principles  embodied  in  them  ? 

A.    Very  much,  but  not  altogether. 


APPENDIX.  677 

Q.  Do  you  call  that  a  good  principle,  lying  at  the  foundation  of  one  of 
these  laws,  which  is  not  true  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Is  it  true,  in  your  judgment,  that  to  sell  a  glass  of  cider  or  a  gallon 
of  cider  is  in  every  case  a  sin  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  that  is  exactly  the  principle  involved  in  the  law. 

Q.  The  Committee  will  judge  whether  that  be  the  principle  of  the  law  or 
not.  I  only  ask,  if  that  be  the  principle  of  the  law,  is  it  true  that  it  is  a  sin,  in 
all  cases,  to  sell  a  glass  of  cider  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  it  may  be  of  such  immoral  tendency,  tending  to,  and  insepa- 
rably connected  with,  the  sale  of  other  liquors,  that  it  may  be  wise  to  include 
that 

Q.  My  question  is,  is  the  act  a  sin  ?  You  arc  a  teacher  of  morals  and 
religion, — is  it  a  sin  ? 

A.  Well,  for  me  to  sell  any  intoxicating  drink  as  a  beverage, — I  could  sell 
it  as  a  medicine,  or  to  be  used  in  the  arts, — but  to  sell  it  to  be  drank  as  a 
beverage,  looks  to  me  like  preying  upon  the  good  of  society ;  simply  like 
piracy,  or  the  slave-trade ;  and,  while  there  were  slaveholders  who  were 
perhaps  honest  men,  and  did  not  commit  sin  in  holding  their  fellows  in  bond- 
age, yet  I  think  we  were  safe  enough  in  saying,  as  a  whole,  that  slaveholding 
was  a  sin.  So  I  think  liquor-selling  might  be  classed  as  sin. 

Q.  It  might  be  for  you  and  me.  If  I  entertain  an  opinion  that  it  is 
wrong  to  sell,  and  then,  in  violation  of  that  opinion,  I  go  and  sell,  I  agree  that 
I  should  be  guilty ;  but  I  am  asking  you  if,  in  your  judgment,  the  sale  of  this 
liquor,  by  all  persons,  under  all  circumstances,  to  be  drank,  is  a  sin  ? 

A.  We  are  permitted  to  prohibit  a  thing,  even  where  the  individual  may  be 
innocent  in  his  act,  comparatively.  He  is  not  very  high-toned  in  his  moral 
sentiments,  and  he  is  doing  that  which  injures  the  community.  It  was  right 
for  us  to  prohibit  the  slave-trade,  though  men  sometimes  thought  they  could 
own  an  interest  in  a  slaver,  and  yet  be  conscientious,  good  men.  But  it  was 
such  a  manifest  immorality,  that  we  had  a  right  to  prohibit  it. 

Q.  That  was  a  sin  in  itself.  To  undertake  to  sell  a  man  for  money,  is  as 
much  a  sin  as  anything  can  be.  Now,  is  the  sale  by  a  druggist  in  Boston 
of  a  pint  of  whiskey,  at  the  request  of  a  physician,  a  sin  ? 

A.     I  said  I  could  sell  it  for  medicine. 

Q.     In  violation  of  this  law  ? 

A.  I  do  not  suppose  that  this  law  is  violated,  when  a  man  sells  liquor  for 
medicine. 

Q.     It  happens  that  it  is.     I  mean,  any  druggist. 

A.     Well,  sir,  there  must  be  restrictions. 

Q.  A  party  does  not  please  to  go  to  the  State  Agency,  and  he  goes  to  a 
regular  druggist  in  Boston  ;  the  question  is,  whether  it  is  a  sin  for  the  drug- 
gist to  sell  him  this  pint  of  whiskey  to  be  used  in  his  family  as  a  medicine  ? 

A.  He  should  "  please  "  to  go  there,  because  the  public  interest  requires 
that  the  sale  should  be  regulated  ;  and,  if  the  druggist  is  a  man  who  has  the 
public  welfare  at  heart,  he  will  waive  the  pright  of  selling  liquor,  and  give  it 
into  the  hands  of  the  constituted  agent. 


678  APPENDIX, 

Q.  Suppose  you  have  got  no  constituted  agent  ?  A  great  many  towns  in 
the  Commonwealth  have  not  got  any. 

A .     Oh,  well,  that  is  an  exceptional  case. 

Q.  Would  it  be  wrong  in  every  case, — that  is  what  I  want  to  get  at, — to 
sell  a  glass  of  whiskey,  or  a  pint  of  whiskey  ? 

A.  I  have  stated  my  opinion  very  clearly.  I  don't  think  it  is  material  to 
the  case  to  decide  whether  the  sale  of  one  glass  is  a  sin  in  all  cases  or  not. 

Q.     Are  you  unwilling  to  give  your  opinion  ? 

A.  I  gave  my  opinion  very  decidedly,  that,  in  respect  to  myself,  I  could 
not  sell  a  glass  of  liquor.  In  a  case  of  necessity,  I  should  sell  it.  If  I  saw  a 
man  dying  for  want  of  it,  I  should  sell  it. 

TESTIMONY  OF  JAMES  H.  UPHAM. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  are  one  of  the  town  officers  of  the  town  of 
Dorchester  ? 

A .    I  am  one  of  the  Selectmen  of  Dorchester. 

Q.  Will  you,  in  as  brief  manner  as  possible,  state  the  condition  of  tem- 
perance in  your  town,  and  such  facts  as  you  may  have  in  regard  to  the  oper- 
ation of  prohibition  or  license  ? 

A.  I  can  only  speak,  so  far  as  the  town  of  Dorchester  is  concerned, 
with  reference  to  the  illegal  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors.  When  I  was  first 
elected  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Selectmen,  four  years  ago  this  spring,  I 
think  I  am  safe  in  saying  that  there  were  forty  places  in  the  town  of  Dor- 
chester where  liquor  was  sold  publicly,  in  cellars,  stores  and  saloons.  I  think 
I  am  equally  safe  in  saying  that  there  is  not  a  place  in  Dorchester  where 
liquor  is  sold  now,  excepting  the  two  town  agencies.  The  amount  expended 
by  the  town  of  Dorchester  for  police  services,  three  years  ago,  was  eleven  hun- 
dred and  odd  dollars.  The  amount  expended  last  year  was  four  hundred  and 
thirty-seven  dollars.  From  my  observation,  being  a  man  of  the  people 
and  among  the  people,  I  have  a  good  opportunity  of  observing  in  this 
matter,  and  I  am  of  the  opinion  that  the  amount  of  intemperance  has  very 
much  decreased. 

Q.    Within  what  period  ? 

A.    Within  the  last  two  years, 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  as  to  the  policy  of  repealing,  at  this  stage  of  the 
experiment,  the  present  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.     I  think  it  would  be  very  injudicious. 

Q.    Would  you  feel  it  a  calamity  in  your  town  ? 

A.    Most  assuredly  I  should,  sir. 

Q.     Are  you  aware  whether  other  good  citizens  share  in  your  opinion  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is  the  opinion  of  the  town  of  Dorchester,  as  a  town,  that  the 
suppression  of  the  sale  of  liquor  has  been  a  very  great  benefit  to  the  town. 
I  think  it  was  manifest  in  the  vote  of  our  town  at  our  last  town  meeting. 

Q.    In  what  way  ? 

A.  In  the  election  of  town  officers  notoriously  known  as  men  bound  to 
enforce  the  law. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  your  associates  in  office  have  the  same  views  in  this 
respect  ? 


APPENDIX.  679 

A.    I  do  sir. 

Q.    Your  officials  arc  substantially  a  unit  on  this  subject  ? 

A.     They  are,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  think  Jhat  the  condition  of  things  is  better  than  if  the  people 
did  not  feel  that  the  law  could  be  executed  ? 

A.    I  think  we  all  feel  that  it  is  better. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  If  it  were  left  to  the  town  of  Dorchester  to  say 
whether  they  would  permit  the  sale  of  liquor  or  not,  which  way  would  the 
opinion  of  the  town  go  ? 

A.  I  have  my  opinion.  My  opinion  is  that  the  town  of  Dorchester  would, 
with  a  very  large  majority,  sustain  the  present  law. 

Q.  If  you  had  proof,  showing  that  there  should  be  some  modification  of  the 
present  law,  would  you  think  it  would  be  better  to  change  the  law  than  to 
retain  it  as  it  is  now  ? 

A.     Certainly,  I  think  it  would  be  better. 

Q.  Would  it  be  just  as  well  if  it  were  done  by  the  vote  of  the  town  or 
without  it  ? 

A.  Very  different,  sir.  If  the  vote  was  as  I  represent  that  it  would  be, 
and  the  town  of  Milton,  for  instance,  had  the  privilege  of  selling  liquors,  I 
think  that  the  town  of  Dorchester  would  be  very  much  affected  by  it. 

Q.    Is  liquor  sold  freely  in  Milton  ? 

A.    Not  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.    Is  it  in  Boston  ? 

A.    I  think  it  is  ;  common  report  says  that  it  is. 

Q.    Do  they  ever  have  any  difficulty  in  getting  it  in  Dorchester  or  Boston  ? 

A.    I  suppose  not,  sir. 

Q.  The  benefits  to  be  derived  from  this  law  depend  chiefly  upon  the  fact 
that  it  excludes  the  persons  who  sell  very  generally  ? 

A.    I  suppose  that  may  be  the  cause. 

Q.     You  do  not  get  the  full  benefit  of  the  law  if  they  sell  freely  in  Boston  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  wish  we  could  have  the  benefit  of  it.  The  effort  to  suppress 
the  sale  of  liquor  illegally  is  the  object  of  the  law,  as  I  understand  it. 

Q.    Is  there  liquor  bought  and  used  in  Dorchester  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  that  there  is  liquor  used  and  liquor  bought  of  the 
State  Agency. 

Q.    And  used  for  what  purposes  ?     For  drink  ? 

A.  I  do  not  suppose  that  either  of  the  agents  sell  liquor  except  for  medi- 
cinal or  mechanical  purposes. 

Q.     Do  people  in  Dorchester  use  liquor  ? 

A.    I  have  no  doubt  that  there  are  gentlemen  in  Dorchester  who  use  it. 

Q.     Where  do  they  get  it  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know,  sir. 

Q.     What  is  the  state  of  facts  ?    Is  it  used  in  families  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  it  is.  I  know  it  is  not  in  mine,  except  for  medicinal 
purposes. 

Q.  You  do  not  know  whether  it  is  used  by  any  large  portion  of  your 
people  ? 

A*    I  do  not  know. 


680  APPENDIX. 

Q.     There  is  intemperance  in  your  direction  ? 

A.     We  have  occasionally  an  intemperate  man  in  Dorchester. 

Q.     How  extensive  it  is  you  do  not  know  ? 

A.  I  only  know  that  the  evidences  of  its  use  arc  far  less  frequent  than 
they  were  a  few  years  ago. 

Q.  How  extensive  the  use  of  liquor  in  such  a  manner  as  to  produce  intoxi- 
cation is,  you  do  not  know  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know. 

Q.  Have,  at  any  time  within  two  or  three  years,  the  representatives  of 
Dorchester  been  elected  on  this  principle  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  not  on  the  license  law  ;  they  were  elected  as  Republicans. 

Q.     How  long  ago  ? 

A .     That  was  a  year  ago  this  last  fall. 

Q.     Were  they  in  favor  of  a  license  law  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know,  sir. 

Q.     Were  they  in  favor  of  the  present  law  ? 

A.    I  believe  not. 

Q-  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  But  the  present  board  of  selectmen,  I  understand, 
were  men  whose  opinions  were  well  pronounced  ? 

A.  The  present  board  were  elected  as  temperance  men,  as  men  in  favor 
of  the  enforcement  of  the  law ;  and  the  vote  of  the  town,  as  near  as  my 
memory  serves,  was  in  the  proportion  of  two  to  one.  Mr.  Fox  was  elected  as 
a  representative  because  he  was  a  good  man,  and  Mr.  Pierce  was  a  good 
working  man  for  the  town.  On  Mr.  Fox's  resignation,  I  was  chosen  quite 
unanimously.  The  question  of  temperance  or  intemperance  did  not  enter 
into  the  election  of  Mr.  Pierce  or  Mr.  Fox,  but  it  did  in  my  case. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     You  are  a  total  abstainer  ? 

A.     I  am. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  JOSEPH  G.  COCIIRAN. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)     How  long  have  you  been  missionary  in  Persia  ? 

A .  I  was  on  the  ground  eighteen  years.  It  is  twenty  years  since  we  left 
this  country. 

Q.     At  what  place  were  you  located  ? 

A.  In  the  north-western  province  of  Persia.  Our  mission  is  among  the 
Neetorians,  a  nominally  Christian  portion  of  that  district. 

Q.    Is  that  a  grape-growing  country  ? 

A.     It  is,  sir. 

Q.     And  a  wine-making  country  ? 

A.  It  is,  to  a  very  large  extent.  Perhaps  there  are  few  sections  where 
there  is  more  made  than  in  the  province  of  Azerbijan,  the  north-western  prov- 
ince of  Persia. 

Q.     Is  it  commonly  drank  among  the  population  generally  ? 

A.     The  use  of  it  I  had  perhaps  better  state  in  a  few  words. 

Q.     Please  give  your  general  idea. 

A.  Wine  is  made  there,  a  pure  wine  which  is  never  sweetened.  It  is  never 
adulterated  or  mixed  in  any  way.  The  pure  juice  of  the  grape  is  deposited 
in  large  earthen  jars  or  vessels,  and  it  is  closed  from  the  air  by  skins  that  are 


APPENDIX.  681 

drawn  over  the  mouths  of  these  vessels,  and  it  is  left  to  ferment.  It  is  never 
drank  until  it  is  fermented ;  never  until  it  becomes  wine.  I  have  never 
known  the  use  of  that  which  was  unfermented,  and  that  which  would  be  anal- 
ogous to  the  sweet  cider  that  is  here  used.  I  believe  it  is  not  used  that  way ;  at 
least  not  to  any  extent.  It  is  only  intoxicating  wines  that  are  drank.  And 
this  wine,  deposited  in  these  earthen  jars,  becomes  fermented  after  about  two 
months,  and  then  the  jars  are  opened,  when  we  have  the  "  wine-drinking 
season,"  as  it  is  called.  An  individual  having  his  barrel  of  wine,  will  open  it, 
and  he  is  obliged  to  drink  it  up  in  the  course  of  two  or  three  weeks,  or  it  will 
turn  to  vinegar.  So  he  invites  his  neighbors — five,  or  six,  or  eight — and  they 
sit  with  him  from  day  to  day,  coming  in  the  morning  and  going  swaggering  to 
their  homes  at  eleven  or  twelve  o'clock  at  night  They  sit  with  him  until  that 
wine  is  drank  ;  then  another  of  that  circle  opens  his,  and  so  it  goes  around  in 
the  circle.  A  whole  village  will  be  made  up  of  these  wine-drinking  circles. 
The  whole  village  of  male  adults  will  be  habitually  intoxicated  for  a  month 
or  six  weeks. 

I  speak  now  of  places  not  brought  under  evangelical  influence,  and  I  refer 
to  these  villages  as  we  found  them.  There  is  a  very  marked  difference  now.  I 
remember  on  one  occasion  of  asking  Mar  Yohannan,  on  his  return  from  a  certain 
village,  if  he  had  seen  any  intoxication  there.  "  Intoxication ! "  was  his  reply, 
"  the  very  walls  were  reeling  and  swaggering."  The  extensiveness  of  intem- 
perance there  is  very  great.  I  remember  one  instance  of  sitting  down  with  the 
leading  men  of  a  village,  and  estimating  the  cost ;  and  this  was  in  a  village 
where  some  progress  had  been  made,  and  the  amount  had  been  limited  some- 
what. We  estimated  that  the  cost  of  wine  in  that  village  would  be  about  the 
price  of  half  a  year's  wages  for  every  house :  that  is  to  say,  it  would  be  about 
the  price  of  the  wages  of  a  man  for  half  a  year  in  every  house  in  the  village. 
It  is,  I  believe,  a  generally  received  fact  that  wine  costs  more  there  than  the 
taxes  of  the  government  and  the  church  taxes,  and  the  oppression  of  the  land- 
holders added ;  that  is,  that  the  cost  of  wine  is  more  than  the  cost  of  all 
these  put  together ;  and  we  are  enabled  to  see  the  difference  between  the  use 
of  wine  and  the  result  in  places  where  it  is  not  used.  We  have  a  prohibitory 
law  among  the  Mahommedans,  and  it  is  very  efficient  so  far  as  Mahomme- 
danism  has  control  over  its  subjects.  It  is  a  matter  of  superstition.  Gener- 
ally, I  believe,  Mahommedans  observe  that  regulation.  I  do  not  suppose  a 
conscientious  Mahommedan  would  touch  intoxicating  liquor  in  any  form. 
There  is  a  class  of  unbelieving  Mahommedans  (and  that  class  is  increasing) 
who  are  throwing  off  Mahommedan  influences,  and,  perhaps  we  may  say, 
becoming  Christian  in  name.  This  class  is  increasing,  and  the  intemperance 
is  considerable.  You  will  see  a  large  class  of  these  in  Constantinople.  You 
will  see  in  the  larger  places  a  good  deal  of  intemperance  among  the  Mahom- 
medans ;  but  it  will  be  these  infidel  Mahommedans,  who  have  broken  away 
from  their  religion.  In  the  towns  and  villages  of  our  province,  there  is  no 
wine  made  among  the  Mahommedans.  It  is  a  common  remark  among  them 
to  the  Christians,  "  You  use  your  grapes  for  wine  ;  we  use  ours  for  molasses." 
Grapes  are  used  in  other  ways  very  extensively ;  but  that  is  the  main  use  to 
which  they  are  put,  the  manufacture  of  molasses.  The  Christians  make  less 
of  this  and  more  of  wine.  The  distinction  between  the  Christians  and  the 
80 


682  APPENDIX. 

Mahommedans,  right  by  their  side,  is  very  marked.  They  are  in  a  better 
condition,  and  manifestly  not  owing  to  the  condition  of  their  government 
relations.  The  effect,  as  all  can  see,  is  traceable  in  the  use  of  these  wines. 

Q.    Are  they  in  a  worldly  sense  of  view  more  prosperous  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  they  use  grapes  to  a  large  extent  for  food  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  To  illustrate :  in  our  small  village,  we  lay  in,  in  the  autumn, 
two  tons  of  grapes,  which  are  eaten  during  the  winter.  We  lay  up  about  a 
ton  of  molasses,  and  nearly  a  ton  of  raisins,  all  of  which  are  eaten  as  food. 
And  they  are  eaten  extensively  by  the  people,  and  even  by  the  lower  class  as 
food.  These  raisins  are  so  abundant  that  the  common  people  find  that  that 
kind  of  food  is  about  as  obtainable  as  others. 

Q.     Do  these  people  who  drink  wine  to  that  extent  profess  any  religion  ? 

A.  They  are  nominally  Christians  of  the  old  Nestorian  Church.  Wine 
has  been  sanctioned  by  their  priests,  though  of  course  drunkenness  is  con- 
demned by  them — that  is,  theoretically.  We  find  it  very  easy  to  produce  a 
reform  among  them.  We  have  a  very  short  argument  with  them.  We  say 
that  drunkenness  is  a  sin  ;  and  that  the  use  of  wine  produces  drunkenness, 
and  therefore  ought  to  be  abandoned.  And  they  come  right  to  total  absti- 
nence from  the  use  of  wine  as  a  beverage.  We  have  found  it  necessary  to 
circulate  temperance  pledges  in  this  way.  And  we  find  a  very  marked 
difference.  We  have  villages  where  there  was  four  or  five  times  as  much 
wine  made  thirty  years  ago  as  there  is  now.  There  are  some  places  where 
there  was  formerly  a  large  amount  made  every  year,  and  where  five  or  six 
years  ago  there  was  not  a  man  who  made  any ;  subsequently  there  was  some 
made,  and  perhaps  there  may  have  been  last  year.  The  leading  men 
controlled  the  matter  and  prevented  the  making  of  it. 

Q.    Islamism  is  the  nominal  religion  of  Persia  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  the  ruling  class  are  Mohammedans. 

Q.     And  there  are  large  numbers  in  Turkey  and  in  Europe  ? 

A.  I  suppose  there  are  some  hundred  and  fifty  millions  of  Mahammedans 
in  Northern  Africa  and  Western  Asia. 

Q.    What  proportion  had  you  supposed  had  become  rather  heretical  ? 

A.    I  am  not  prepared  to  say. 

Q.    Would  you  guess  one-half? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  should  not  suppose  more  than  a  quarter  had  broken  quite 
away  from  restraints ;  it  may  be  not  a  quarter. 

Q.  So  that  you  have,  in  your  judgment,  considerably  over  a  hundred 
millions  who  do  not  use  wine  ? 

A.  So  far  as  I  know,  sir.  I  am  not  informed  in  reference  to  Northern 
Africa  and  that  region.  I  have  no  recollection  of  hearing  any  statements 
made  as  to  that  region.  I  know  that  it  is  a  law  of  the  Koran ;  and  that,  in 
our  section  of  Persia,  that  law  is  enforced  by  the  clergy  and  leading  class  of 
Mohammedans. 

Q.  And  it  is  universally  regarded  by  those  who  are  regarded  as  the  true 
followers  of  the  prophet  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Mohammed  lived  about  twelve  centuries  ago  ? 


APPENDIX.  683 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     What  is  your  climate  there  ? 

A.  We  have  a  mild  climate.  It  is  about  the  latitude  of  Southern  Virginia. 
But  we  are  in  the  mountains,  about  five  thousand  feet  above  the  level  of  the 
sea.  The  summers  are  long,  and  the  crops  are  brought  forward  three  or  four 
weeks  earlier  than  in  this  State. 

Q.    Have  you  any  consumption  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  think  there  is  none.  It  is  my  general  impression  that  there 
are  no  cases  of  adult  consumption. 

Q.     I  have  heard  that  there  are  cases  of  infants  having  consumption  ? 

A.     There  may  be  some  few  instances  of  that,  but  they  are  rare. 

Q.    Is  not  the  use  of  goats'  milk  almost  universal  in  that  region  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Why  I  asked  this  is,  because  our  friends  at  Harvard  College  describe 
whiskey  as  being  useful  in  cases  of  consumption.  I  propose  to  introduce  goats' 
milk.  No  man  who  drinks  goats'  milk  in  your  country  has  consumption,  does 
he? 

A.  We  do  not  find  consumption,  and  we  do  find  goats'  milk.  Whether 
I  should  put  the  two  things  together  I  am  not  prepared  to  say. 

Q.  Those  that  you  term  real  Christians,  those  that  come  under  your  influ- 
ence and  profess  to  be  believers,  those  under  the  influence  of  the  missionaries, 
do  they  generally  abstain  from  the  use  of  wines  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  generally :  that  is  the  rule — there  are  some  few  exceptions. 
And  the  rule  would  hold  to  a  greater  extent,  perhaps,  than  in  this  country. 

Q.     The  old  Nestorians  there  consider  it  rather  a  nominal  thing  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  say  there  is  a  marked  difference  between  those  who  do  not  and 
those  who  do  drink  wine  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  But  there  are  other  evils  among  the  Mohammedans  than  that. 
The  polygamy  of  the  country  is  disastrous  in  its  results.  But  they  have  the 
advantage  on  the  wine  question  without  any  doubt. 

Q.     Have  you  noticed  tho  effect  upon  evangelical  people  generally  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  those  that  educate  themselves  to  it  shorten  their  lives  mate- 
rially. And  I  should  state  further  than  I  did,  in  reference  to  the  intemperance 
there.  Those  who  acquire  the  habit  of  drinking  wine  very  soon  commence 
drinking  a  kind  of  whiskey  that  is  made  there,  arrack  or  arrache,  as  it  is  called 
in  some  nations  of  the  East.  The  better  class,  those  in  better  circumstances^ 
will  pass  from  the  use  of  wine  to  the  use  of  this  arrack.  They  use  it  to  excess, 
and  you  will  see  all  the  evils  that  you  do  in  the  purlieus  of  our  cities,  so  far  as 
it  prevails. 

Q.    It  is  referable  to  the  use  of  wine  ? 

A.  It  is,  unquestionably,  sir.  They  commence  with  wine  and  use  that  for 
some  years,  and  then  go  to  something  stronger.  There  may  be  some  cases 
where  they  commence  with  the  brandy ;  but  I  am  acquainted  with  more 
instances  where  they  have  acquired  the  habit  of  drinking  arrack  from  drinking 
wine. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  If  I  understood  you,  you  said  that  as  soon  as  they 
opened  this  wine,  they  had  to  drink  it  up  in  order  to  keep  it  from  spoiling  ? 


684  APPENDIX. 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q,     They  have  no  means  of  preserving  their  wine  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  They  make  no  wooden  casks,  and  they  cannot  close  up  the 
earthen  vessels  easily. 

Q.     The  people?  in  these  arts  of  life,  are  not  very  far  advanced  ? 

A.  Oh,  no,  sir.  They  would  not  be  ranked  with  many  Indiamen,  nor 
with  those  in  Africa.  They  are  in  a  semi-civilized  state. 

Q.     How  long  does  this  drinking-season  continue  ? 

A.  I  should  think  it  would  average  a  month  and  a  half.  There  are  some 
in  every  village  that  drink  longer.  And  there  are  some  that  are  able  to  drink 
the  wine  through  the  year.  But  I  am  speaking  of  the  majority. 

Q.  In  your  own  work  do  you  find  any  difficulty  in  bringing  the  people  to 
a  condition  of  total  abstinence,  any  more  than  you  do  to  embrace  Christianity 
and  other  teachings  ? 

A.  To  induce  them  to  practice  it  universally,  there  is  some  difficulty;  but 
they  subscribe  to  the  doctrine.  They  all  see  the  necessity  of  suppressing  the 
evil  as  it  exists  there. 

Q.  So  far  as  those  who  come  within  your  immediate  instruction,  whom  you 
call  within  your  own  flock,  have  you  been  very  successful  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;  there  is  a  marked  change  there. 

Q.  Tliis  you  have  accomplished  by  what  means  ?  By  your  own  moral 
means  of  teaching  and  instruction  ? 

A.  We  have  not  made  intemperance  a  disciplinary  thing.  We  have  not 
been  called  to  do  it  as  a  rule  ;  however  if  an  individual  who  was  a  member 
of  our  communion  were  to  get  into  one  of  these  wine  circles,  we  should  dis- 
cipline such  an  offence  as  that.  But  what  I  mean  is,  that  we  have  not  made 
the  signing  of  the  pledge  a  condition  of  the  admission  to  our  communion. 

Q.     The  means  which  you  have  used  have  been  moral  means  ? 

A.     We  have  relied  mainly  on  those,  sir. 

Q.  You  have  had  no  aid  in  that  work  from  any  law  of  the  State  or  of  the 
country  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  go  to  the  State  for  anything  ? 

A.  I  should  not  hesitate  to  state  that,  to  institute  any  means  of  that  kind 
to-day,  the  results  might  be  unfavorable ;  but  if  a  moral  sentiment  existed, 
euch  as  there  is  in  this  country,  it  would  materially  affect  the  question. 

(2.     In  the  present  state  of  things,  you  do  not  ask  anything  of  that  kind  ? 

A.    It  would  be  worthless  if  we  were  to  get  it. 

Q-     (By  Mr.  SHERMAN.)     Is  arrack  mixed  with  wine  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  have  never  known  of  it.  When  wine  is  bottled,  as  it  is  in 
gome  cases,  and  sealed  hermetically,  it  can  be  kept  for  years  sometimes. 

TESTIMONY  OF  GEORGE  A.  WALTON. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)    You  are  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Aldermen  in 
your  city  ? 
A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Is  it  your  first  year  in  that  relation  ? 
A.    Yes,  sir. 


APPENDIX.  685 

Q.  Will  you  state,  as  briefly  as  you  can,  your  opinion,  and  the  results  of 
your  observation  and  conviction  in  regard  to  the  question  here  at  issue,  and 
give  the  Committee  any  such  information  as  you  have  that  you  deem  valu. 
able? 

A.  I  have  been,  sir,  a  teacher  in  the  city  of  Lawrence  for  nearly  eighteen 
years,  in  the  public  schools ;  and  I  should  say,  from  my  observation  in  that 
relation,  that  nine-tenths  of  all  the  crime  and  misery  of  our  city  has  resulted 
directly  or  indirectly  from  the  use  of  alcoholic  drinks.  I  took  pains,  sir, 
being  notified  to  appear  here,  to  look  over  the  reports  of  our  city  marshal 
from  1862  to  the  present  time,  in  order  to  see  what  the  proportion  of  arrests 
for  drunkenness  was  compared  with  those  made  for  other  crimes  ;  and  I  find 
that  the  proportion  for  the  whole  of  this  time  was  about  fifty-two  per  cent, 
for  drunkenness. 

Q.     From  what  time  ? 

A.  From  1862  to  1867.  The  reports  were  not  preserved  in  full,  but  these 
are  the  results  of  all  those  handed  me.  I  also  looked  over  the  reports  as  to 
the  relative  number  of  arrests  for  drunkenness  from  that  time  to  the  present. 
I  should  say  instead  of  1862,  that  it  was  from  1863.  I  find  that  the  per  cent, 
of  arrests  in  1863  in  the  city  of  Lawrence  was  sixty ;  in  1864,  it  was  fifty- 
five  ;  in  1865,  it  was  fifty-two ;  in  1866,  it  was  fifty-five ;  and  the  present  year 
it  was  fifty  per  cent.  This  shows  a  constant  decrease  in  the  per  cent,  of 
arrests  from  1863  to  1867,  with  the  exception  of  the  year  1866,  when  we  had 
fifty-five  per  cent.  These,  I  should  state,  were  for  the  first  three  months,  that 
is,  the  first  quarter  of  these  years.  I  did  not  select  these  because  they  were 
any  more  favorable  to  this  view  than  any  other  period,  but  because  I  wanted 
to  compare  former  years  with  the  present  year ;  and  this  year  would  only 
bring  it  down  to  the  fifteenth  of  the  present  month. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     Have  you  the  percentage  for  each  year  ? 

A.  I  have  the  percentage  for  a  portion  of  the  years.  The  percentage  for 
1863  was  sixty-five  ;  for  1864,  fifty-one  ;  for  1865,  forty-seven ;  for  1866,  fifty- 
six. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MESTER.)  Are  there  any  other  statements  which  you  would 
like  to  make  ? 

A.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  tendency  of  our  system  of  regulation  is  to 
induce  our  officers  to  carry  out  the  law  more  fully.  Our  city  marshal  and 
assistant-marshal  receive  a  salary  ;  and  beside  that  salary  they  have  been  in 
the  habit  of  receiving  fees  in  case  of  these  arrests.  Ndw,  if  they  bring  up 
men  for  any  offence,  they  secure  a  fee  of,  we  will  say,  something  like  two  dol- 
lars and  a  half  for  each  case.  The  question  would  be,  if  the  number  of  cases 
had  increased,  whether  there  would  not  be,  in  an  efficient  officer,  especially  if 
he  looked  to  these  emoluments,  an  inclination  on  his  part,  as  ordinances  are, 
to  increase  the  number  of  cases  which  he  would  bring  in. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  touching  the  desirableness  of  preserving  the 
existing  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt,  sir,  that  it  is  desirable  to  preserve  it,  and  to  improve 
it,  if  we  can. 

Q.  You  have  entire  confidence  in  the  practicability  of  ts  execution  in 
your  city  ? 


686  APPENDIX. 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  have  no  doubt  that  Jt  can  be  executed  as  far  as  other  laws 
are  executed  in  the  city. 

Q.  Do  you  or  not  think  that  the  execution  of  it  would  tend  to  the  execu- 
tion of  other  laws  and  lessen  crime  ? 

A.     I  certainly  think  so. 

Q.  Have  you  knowledge  of  the  influence  upon  the  other  laws  ?  Do  you 
think  there  would  be  evils  growing  out  of  the  influence  of  this  law  upon  other 
laws? 

A.    No,  sir;  my  conviction  is  that  it  would  be  the  other  way. 

Q.  Do  you  feel  that  it  would  dampen  the  spirits  of  good  moral  men  in  your 
town? 

A.  I  think  our  moral  efforts  are  very  much  increased  by  the  prohibitory 
law ;  and  that  our  temperance  men  work,  since  the  appointment  of  the  State 
Police,  with  their  moral  means  more  earnestly  than  they  did  before.  And  it 
seems  to  me  reasonable  that  that  sht  uld  be  so. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Have  you  not  got  the  percentage  from  1860  ?  You 
took  an  average  of  fifty-two  per  cent.  ? 

A.     I  took  it  from  1863. 

Q.    You  stated  that  the  average  was  fifty-two  per  cent.  ? 

A.    I  stated  at  first  that  it  was  1862,  but  it  was  1863. 

Q.  By  that  it  appears  that  the  number  of  arrests  last  year  was  greater 
than  the  average  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir  ;  in  the  total,  and  in  the  whole  period  of  the  year. 

Q.  Then  there  was  some  drunkenness  last  year,  so  far  as  these  returns 
go,  and  so  far  as  your  testimony  goes  ? 

A.     That  seems  to  be  the  natural  inference. 

Q.  And  at  the  same  time  were  there  during  the  last  few  years,  and  up  to 
1867  any  open  places  of  sale  in  Lawrence  ? 

A.  I  never  saw  of  myself,  that  I  know  of,  a  single  glass  of  liquor  sold  in 
Lawrence.  I  have  not  been  in  the  habit  of  going  into  those  places  where 
liquor  was  sold. 

Q.     There  were  no  open,  visible  places  where  liquor  was  sold  there  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  should  say  that  sometimes  I  could  have  gone  about  our 
city,  and  have  said,  from  what  was  visible,  that  there  were  fifty  places  that 
could  be  designated,  any  time  within  the  last  fifteen  years. 

Q.     Last  year  I  am  talking  about. 

A.  During  the  last  year,  I  should  say  that  I  had  seen  barrels  of  what  was 
apparently  liquor  about  the  cellars  and  groggeries. 

Q.  I  was  only  inquiring  as  to  the  open  sale  when  you  stated  that  there 
was  no  open  sale,  and  there  was. 

A.    I  did  not  so  state. 

Q.  Then  there  are  open  places  of  sale,  and  have  been  during  the  last 
year  ? 

A.  I  say  about  that,  that  I  never  have  seen  any  liquor  sold  in  Lawrence  ; 
so  that  I  cannot  say  absolutely  about  that. 

Q.  Then  I  would  inquire  whether  the  operations  of  the  State  Constable 
during  1866  and  1867  have  really  closed  the  places  where  liquor  is  sold 
in  Lawrence  ? 


APPENDIX.  687 

A.     Well,  sir ;  I  can  only  go  by  hearsay. 

Q.    Have  you  seen  anything  in  your  own  observation  to  induce  you  to 
suppose  that  he  did  not  close  them  all  ? 

A.    I  have  seen  casks  of  liquor  going  through  our  streets  (I  should  say 
liquor),  within  a  few  days. 

Q.     Has  the  operation  of  the  State  Constables,  during  the  year  1866, 
closed  the  open  sale  of  liquor  in  Lawrence  ? 

A.    I  should  say  that  it  had  undoubtedly  curtailed  the  sales  to  a  very  great 
extent. 

Q.    But  you  will  not  say  that  it  has  closed  the  retail  business  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     And  you  will  say  that,  in  the  last  year,  there  has  been  more  drunken- 
ness, so  far  as  you  have  got  information,  and  from  1863  to  the  present  time  ? 

A.    I  should  say,  from  my  own  observation,  that  drunkenness  had  dimin- 
ished to  a  very  great  extent. 

Q.     But  yet  the  number  of  arrests  were  greater  during  that  year  than 
during  any  other  year. 

A.    No,  sir ;  not  than  any  other. 

Q.     What  was  the  number  of  arrests  in  1863  ? 

A.     The  number  of  arrests  I  cannot  give  you,  sir.     I  have  not  observed 
any  further  than  the  percentage  which  I  drew  off. 

Q.     Can  you  tell  the  number  of  arrests  in  1864  ?     Have  you  got  them  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  have  not  any  of  those. 

Q.     Have  you  given  them  in  1866  ? 

A.    No,  sir;  I  have  none  of  the  totals,  but  the  percentage. 

Q.    You  are  unable  to  tell  how  many  arrests  there  were. 

A.    I  had  the  notes,  but  I  have  not  got  them.     I  could  tell  pretty  near,  I 
should  say  that  the  total  number  of  arrests  for  last  year  was  three  hundred. 

Q.     The  total  number  of  arrests  was  greater  than  any  year  previously. 
Have  you  got  any  statements  ? 

A .    No,  sir ;  I  have  not. 

Q.     Are  you  at  all  prepared  to  contradict  the  correctness  of  the  statements 
which  have  been  made  on  this  point  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  am  not. 

Q.     Where  does  this  liquor  come  from  which  you  see  carted  through  the 
streets  ?    By  what  agency  is  it  brought  there  ? 

A.    I  suppose  it  comes  over  our  railroad. 

Q.     The  express  does  a  large  business  at  it  ? 

A.    It  is  carried,  I  should  say,  over  the  railroad  (I  am  merely  guessing  at 
this,  however,  sir),  and  carried  by  our  teamsters. 

Q.    Where  do  the  barrels  go  to?    Into  stores,  to  be  retailed,  or  into 
families,  to  be  consumed  by  the  families  ? 

A.     This  being  in  casks,  which  I  refer  to,  I  should  say  that  it  was  more 
likely  to  go  into  the  stores. 

Q.     And  there  they  are  retailed,  I  suppose.     Any  doubt  about  it  ? 

A.    I  have  no  reason  to  doubt  it. 

Q.     Are  there  quite  a  large  number  of  kegs  and  demijohns  and  jugs 
brought  in  in  that  way  ? 


688  APPENDIX. 

A.    I  have  not  understood  about  that. 

Q.  Does  it  make  any  difference,  in  your  opinion,  whether  the  people  buy 
the  liquor  and  send  it  over  the  road  or  buy  it  at  the  stores  ? 

A.  My  own  feeling  is,  from  observation  in  Lawrence,  that  if  we  could  save 
the  young  people  there  in  town  from  the  liquor  which  is  exposed  to  view,  by 
which  they  are  tempted  and  begin  to  drink,  we  should  save  effectually  a  large 
part  of  this  class  of  persons  who  have  never  learned  to  drink ;  and  if  they 
never  find  it  except  in  families,  the  families  of  this  class  of  persons  would  not 
be  very  likely  to  use  the  liquor ;  so  that  it  would  be  an  advantage  to  have  it 
in  the  families  rather  than  in  the  shops. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  clubs  have  been  organized  in  Lawrence,  where 
persons  have  a  common  stock  of  liquors  of  various  kinds,  and  go  and  drink  it 
as  they  please  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  that  there  is. 

'Q.     Have  you  never  understood  that  such  is  the  fact  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     You  have  not  heard  anything  about  it  ? 

A.     No,  sir  ;  not  until  a  witness  testified  so  from  Lynn  to-day. 

Q.     Should  you  be  apt  to  know  it  if  it  did  exist  ? 

A.     It  might  exist  without  my  knowing  it. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  GEORGE  P.  WILSON. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Do  you  reside  in  Lawrence  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     You  are  city  missionary  there  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  should  like  to  know  what  your  observation  in  that  position  has  been, 
and  what  conclusion  that  has  brought  you  to  in  regard  to  the  question  between 
the  prohibitory  law  and  a  license  law  ? 

A.  I  have  been  city  missionary  now  eight  years,  and  chaplain  of  the  jail 
some  seven  years.  All  the  time  from  the  commencement,  my  attention  has 
been  brought  to  the  effects  of  intemperance,  by  seeing  the  poverty,  distress 
and  crime  arising  from  it.  And  I  have  this  very  sincere  conviction,  that  the 
prohibitory  law  has  helped  the  temperance  sentiment  and  the  temperance 
people  of  our  city.  During  the  first  three  years  of  the  war,  intemperance 
largely  increased.  In  our  city  and  in  the  places  about  us,  the  cause  of  this 
was  very  largely  from  the  war,  and  for  the  reason  that  the  temperance  people 
who  were  drawn  to  supply  the  soldiers  in  the  field,  and  the  agitation  of  the 
temperance  question  ceased  almost  entirely.  Intemperance  increased  until 
some  two  years  and  a  half  ago,  when  the  subject  was  brought  up  in  public 
meetings,  and  since  that  time  public  meetings  have  been  held  once  a  fort- 
night in  the  churches  and  public  halls,  and  the  temperance  sentiment  has 
increased,  and  the  sentiment  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory  law  has  increased,  so 
far  as  my  observation  goes,  and  I  have  had  some  considerable  experience  in 
this  matter,  and  in  the  work  that  has  been  going  on.  I  have  thought,  and 
other  people  have  remarked,  that  the  temperance  principle  was  helped  very 
largely  by  the  law.  There  is  less  intemperance  to-day  in  Lawrence,  from  this 
fact.  There  are  many  who  were  known  to  drink,  who  now  do  not  drink  at 


APPENDIX.  689 

all,  consequently  there  is  less  drank,  so  far  as  they  are  concerned.  I  have 
reason  to  know  that  all  the  active  temperance  men  in  Lawrence  would  con- 
sider it  the  greatest  calamity  that  could  happen  to  them,  to  pass  a  license 
law.  There  is  a  petition  now  in  circulation  among  the  legal  voters,  remon- 
strating against  the  passage  of  such  a  law.  And  the  wives  and  children  of 
those  who  drink  implore  the  legal  voters  that  there  shall  not  be  a  power  to 
license  the  sale.  I  have  had  this  presented  to  me  time  and  again  by  those 
who  suffer.  There  has  also  been  a  petition  circulated  among  the  ladies,  and 
a  very  large  number  of  them  have  signed  that  petition.  I  think  that  if  the 
sale  was  legalized  and  made  respectable,  many  men  who  have  joined  our 
temperance  societies  would  be  lured  to  drink ;  and  I  also  believe  that  there  is 
no  safe  position  but  total  abstinence  from  intoxicating  drink  as  a  beverage. 

Q.     What  is  the  population  of  Lawrence  ? 

A.     About  ten  thousand. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  resided  in  Lawrence  ? 

A.  Some  fifteen  years.  For  ten  years  I  know  of  no  prominent  or  open 
temperance  man  that  has  changed  his  views  or  opinion  of  the  license  law.  I 
do  know  men,  who  signed  a  petition  last  year  for  a  license  law,  who  have 
signed  a  petition  in  remonstrance  this  year,  having  changed  their  opinion 
within  a  year. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     There  is  intemperance  in  Lawrence  now>  I  suppose  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Is  there  any  open  sale  in  Lawrence  ? 

A.  I  think  there  is  no  public  sale.  I  think  it  would  be  very  difficult  for  a 
stranger  to  get  strong  liquor  in  Lawrence. 

Q.     If  he  understood  the  way  he  could  get  it,  could  he  not  ? 

A.    I  have  no  doubt  that  the  initiated  could. 

Q.     Are  there  more  secret  places  of  sale  ? 

A.    I  think  there  are  less  secret  places  and  less  sale. 

Q.     Is  there  more  liquor  sold  ? 

A.  Liquor  has  not  been  very  openly  sold.  It  has  been  a  matter  of  con- 
cealment generally. 

Q.  Has  there  not  been  a  statement  made  in  regard  to  the  number  of 
arrests  ? 

A.  It  may  seem  a  strange  fact,  but  I  think  that  the  temperance  meetings 
had  something  to  do  with  that  matter.  It  was  very  easy,  sometimes,  to  lead 
persons  home,  when  they  might  have  been  taken  and  locked  up. 

Q.     Will  any  law  operate  effectually  without  moral  means  to  support  it  ? 

A.     Not  entirely,  sir ;  until  we  get  another  generation. 

Q.     Do  you  think  you  can  educate  the  people  up  to  that  standard  ? 

A.     We  have  got  about  a  thousand  boys  and  girls  in  the  Band  of  Hope. 

Q.  Will  it  not,  after  all,  depend  very  much  on  the  usages,  and  the 
temptations,  and  the  moral  sense  and  the  moral  standard  of  the  community  ? 

A.  I  think  so,  sir  ;  and  for  that  reason  I  hope  there  will  be  no  license  to 
sell  that  they  may  be  tempted. 

Q.     Which  is  the  worse,  to  sell  openly  or  to  sell  secretly  ? 
87 


690  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  think  that  the  effect  on  the  community  is  very  much  worse  to  sell 
while  we  have  a  law  against  it.  It  is  then  considered  a  crime  by  a  very 
large  number  of  good  people. 

Q.  Are  there  not  a  large  number  of  people  who  buy  liquor  who  are 
respectable  men  in  which  the  sale  to  them  is  a  crime  ? 

A.  Not  a  large  number.  There  are  some  who  are  very  good  citizens,  and 
in  every  other  way  reliable  men.  . 

Q.  Is  there  any  effect  upon  the  moral  force  of  a  law,  in  your  judgment, 
where  it  is  not  regarded  as  a  wrong  to  violate  it  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  it  is  any  more  so  than  any  criminal  law. 

Q.  In  any  criminal  law,  do  you  think  it  would  have  an  injurious  effect 
produced  by  the  open  violation  of  it  ? 

A.     It  may  be  so. 

Q.  This  no  more  than  any  other  ?  Nevertheless  it  is  true  that  it  is  quite 
undesirable  that  this  law  should  be  violated  by  that  class  of  people  ? 

A.     I  think  so,  certainly. 

Q.  Is  not  the  influence  worse  than  if  they  purchased  this  liq»or  under  the 
permission  of  the  law  ? 

A.  A  very  large  majority  of  those  who  would  purchase  tb.s  liquor,  if  it 
was  licensed,  do  not  dare  to  buy  it  now,  and  do  not  buy  it. 

Q.     How  extensive  do  you  know  that  to  be  so  ? 

A.  From  what  I  know  of  persons,  and  of  the  inability  to  get  it  in  what 
they  would  call  respectable  places. 

Q.  You  suppose  that  they  are  kept  from  it  because  there  are  no  respec- 
table places  ? 

A.     I  suppose  so,  sir. 

Q.     Would  that  account  for  sending  down  to  Boston  to  get  it  ? 

A.     I  suppose  there  are  some,  sir. 

Q.    Is  the  influence  bad  upon  the  cause  of  temperance  in  that  way  ? 

A.  Perhaps  so.  The  reason  that  we  cannot  enforce  the  law  with  us  is, 
because  it  is  not  enforced  in  Boston. 

Q.  Have  you  noticed  what  has  been  stated  by  other  witnesses,  as  to  liquors 
in  barrels  and  casks  being  brought  into  the  city  by  expressmen  ? 

A.     There  is  quite  a  quantity  of  beer  brought  in. 

Q.     The  quantity,  is  that  very  great  ? 

A.     Not  so  much  as  in  former  years. 

Q.     How  do  you  make  that  statement  ? 

A.     By  inquiring  at  the  depot. 

Q.    Do  you  get  from  the  depot  any  exact  statement  as  to  the  amount  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Did  they  tell  you  how  much  it  had  fallen  off? 

A.  No,  sir ;  only  that  there  was  considerably  less  brought  in  during  the 
last  eighteen  months. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SHERMAN.)  Supposing  the  sales  were  stopped  in  Boston ; 
would  not  the  Lawrence  people  supply  themselves  from  Manchester  ? 

A.  Possibly  they  might ;  but  I  do  not  think  they  would  to  the  extent  that 
they  do  now.  There  is  comparatively  little  bu";ness  done  between  the  two 
places. 


APPENDIX.  691 

Q.    It  would  be  possible  for  people  to  send  there  V 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  do  not  know  why  they  should  not  go  there  just  as  well  as 
anywhere. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Do  you  suppose  that  there  is  any  way  that,  if  peo- 
ple desire  to  drink  liquor,  they  will  not  get  it  ? 

A.  I  have  some  experience  in  suppressing  it  at  Lawrence,  and  have  talked 
temperance,  and  obtained  pledges ;  and  I  do  not  think  that  some  of  them 
would  drink  unless  they  knew  they  could  be  certain  that  it  could  be  obtained 
in  certain  places. 

Q.     Do  you  think  it  would  entirely  stop  the  purchasing  of  liquor  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  it  would  be  entirely  stopped.  I  presume  some  would 
send  to  New  York  or  to  San  Francisco,  if  need  be,  for  it. 

Q.     Is  there  any  distillation  ?     How  is  that  to  be  prevented  ? 

A.     By  the  sharp  eyes  of  the  State  Constable. 

Q.  The  liquor  being  in  the  country,  I  suppose  no  one  expects  to  exclude 
it.  Half  of  it  is  used  in  the  arts,  and  gets  into  the  hands  of  the  people. 
Now  do  you  suppose  any  kind  of  a  law  is  going  to  prevent  these  persons  from 
getting  it  ? 

A.    Not  entirely. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  You  stated  that  the  influence  of  the  agitation  by 
the  temperance  men  might  have  an  influence  on  the  number  of  arrests  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Then  do  you  think  the  number  of  arrests  necessarily  indicates  the 
amount  of  drunkenness  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  not  necessarily.  I  might  state  that  a  large  number  of  our 
people  have  been  in  favor  of  a  license  law,  and  I  presume  that  a  large  num- 
ber have  been  brought  into  court  as  evidence  that  drunkenness  was  increas- 
ing. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  have  been  asked  if  some  persons  with  strong 
appetites  might  not  send  to  New  Hampshire  to  get  their  liquor,  if  they  could 
not  get  it  in  Boston  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q,  You  are  aware  that  New  Hampshire  is  looking  with  great  interest  to 
Massachusetts  to  see  what  she  will  do  in  executing  the  law.  Do  you  see  any 
more  difficulty  in  closing  the  sale  in  Manchester  than  in  Lawrence  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  JOHN  I.  BAKER. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  your  present 
place  of  business  ? 

A.     At  22  Custom-House  Street,  in  this  city. 

Q.    You  are  the  State  Liquor  Agent  ? 

A.     Sometimes  called  agent ;  I  am  the  State  Liquor  Commissioner. 

Q.  Did  you  seek  your  place  or  was  it  tendered  to  you,  with  an  urgent 
solicitation  to  accept  it  ? 

A .  I  certainly  did  not  seek  the  appointment.  I  declined  accepting  it  for 
a  great  while,  but  was  urged  very  strongly  by  men  to  whom  I  eventually 
deferred. 


692  APPENDIX. 

Q.    Who  gave  you  this  appointment  ? 

A.     Governor  Bullock. 

Q.     Had  the  late  governor  tendered  you  any  place  of  responsibility  ? 

A.  I  held  at  the  time  the  position  of  Inspector  of  Fish  in  this  city,  which 
I  resigned  and  took  this  appointment.  That  was  an  office  quite  as  agreeable 
and  quite  as  lucrative  as  this. 

Q.  Were  either  of  these  places  presented  to  you  on  account  of  any  especial 
knowledge  that  you  had  of  either  fish  or  liquors  ? 

A.     I  had  no  special  knowledge  upon  either  subject. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  relative  remuneration  of  the  two  places.  Without 
going  into  the  subject  of  remuneration,  will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  what 
may  be  of  interest  of  the  operation  of  the  Liquor  Agency  under  your  charge  ? 

A.  My  printed  report,  which  the  Committee  undoubtedly  have  seen, 
shows  a  net  profit  or  apparent  profit  of  two  thousand  dollars  between  the  10th 
of  July  and  the  1st  of  October.  I  followed  copying  in  making  out  that 
report.  I  had  been  in  the  Agency  for  such  a  short  time  I  had  no  experience 
in  the  matter,  and  I  made  up  my  report  as  it  had  been  made  up  heretofore. 
I  charged  nothing  for  interest,  nothing  for  waste  or  leakage  or  evaporation, 
which  is  very  large.  In  January  I  took  an  account  of  stock. 

Q-     Do  you  mean  to  say  January  instead  of  October  ? 

A.  My  account  was  made  up  in  October  according  to  the  law.  In  Janu- 
ary I  took  an  account  of  stock  by  which  it  appeared  that  the  waste  from  those 
sources  was  something  over  three  thousand  dollars,  and  that  the  interest 
account  up  to  that  time  would  have  been  a  thousand  and  odd  dollars,  which 
taken  with  my  expense  account  from  my  commissions  amount  to  a  little  less 
than  fifteen  hundred  from  the  10th  of  July  to  the  1st  of  January.  I  ought  to 
say  that  in  my  expense  account  I  charged  for  furniture  for  office,  amounting, 
perhaps,  to  eight  or  nine  hundred  dollars. 

Q.  Will  you  now  briefly  state  what  is  your  method  of  procedure  in 
discharging  your  duties  of  State  Liquor  Commissioner  ? 

A.  When  I  came  into  the  office,  desiring  to  administer  it  in  the  light  of 
the  law,  and  to  get  the  best  concern  I  could  to  get  my  liquors  from,  I  availed 
myself  of  my  previous  knowledge  of  the  traffic  in  this  city,  which  was  not 
very  limited,  as  I  had  had  the  privilege  of  serving  upon  committees  of  this 
Legislature  for  several  years  when  this  matter  had  been  a  subject  of  legisla- 
tion. In  1852  I  was  appointed  upon  a  committee  of  this  Legislature  that 
reported  the  first  prohibitory  law.  In  1856 1  was  appointed  upon  a  committee 
that  was  investigating  the  manner  in  which  the  law  was  carried  into  operation. 
Complaint  was  then  made  by  liquor-houses  in  this  city  of  the  same  nature 
that  are  now  made  in  regard  to  the  Agency,  and  the  result  of  the  investiga- 
tion of  that  committee  satisfied  me  that  those  liquor-houses  that  made  the 
complaints  and  appeared  here  and  testified,  from  the  character  of  the  testi- 
mony and  from  their  mode  of  procedure  in  the  matter,  were  such  that  they 
ought  not  to  be  trusted.  Therefore,  in  getting  my  supply  of  liquor,  I  did  not 
go  to  those  houses. 

Q.  Will  you  state  as  fully  as  you  feel  warranted  in  doing  the  facts 
pertaining  to  that  matter  ? 


APPENDIX.  693 

A.  I  may  not  recollect  the  particulars.  I  will  only  speak  of  the  impression 
left  upon  my  mind  by  that  investigation.  Mr.  Williams  was  one  of  the 
witnesses.  Complaint  was  made  in  regard  to  his  house  and  also  against  Mr. 
Richards'  house. 

Q.    When  was  this  ? 

A.  In  1856 ;  the  complaint  was  in  regard  to  the  quality  and  price  of 
brandy  furnished  to  the  State  Agency.  During  that  investigation  a  printed 
circular  was  produced  from  the  house  of  Messrs.  Richards,  offering  brandy  at 
a  much  less  rate  than  that  paid  by  the  Agency.  Complaint  had  been  made 
by  the  Agent  that  that  quality  of  brandy  could  not  be  furnished  at  that  price, 
and  this  circular  was  printed  by  the  liquor-houses  which  offered  to  furnish  to 
their  customers  brandy  of  the  same  quality  as  that  furnished  by  the  Agency 
at  a  much  less  rate.  I  cannot  speak  definitely  of  the  facts,  but  that  is  the 
impression  left  upon  my  mind. 

Q.     Do  you  think  of  any  other  houses  that  were  involved  in  that  testimony  ? 

A.    I  can  recall  to  mind  but  those  two. 

Q.  You  were  satisfied  from  the  revelations  made  in  regard  to  those  houses 
that  the  quality  of  liquor  which  was  furnished,  and  the  transactions  into 
which  they  had  entered,  did  not  warrant  you  in  going  to  them  ?  . 

A.  That  was  my  impression,  and  subsequent  matters  rather  tended  to 
confirm  that  impression.  I  then  inquired,  both  of  temperance  friends  and 
others,  in  regard  to  what  houses  it  would  be  better  to  obtain  a  supply.  I 
ought  to  state  that  I  had  no  capital  to  put  into  this  business.  My  means  were 
very  limited  indeed.  All  that  I  had  to  put  into  it  was  character.  I  inquired 
of  my  friends,  and  they  universally  joined  in  recommending  Foster  &  Taylor. 
It  had  been  my  privilege  to  know  Mr.  Foster  formerly.  I  boarded  at  the 
same  house  with  him  years  ago,  and  formed  a  very  pleasant  acquaintance 
with  him.  I  had  entertained  a  very  favorable  opinion  of  him  ever  since.  I 
was  informed  that  his  was  the  only  liquor-house  in  town  that  conformed  sub- 
stantially to  the  requirements  of  the  law.  They  do  not  break  packages  and 
sell  contrary  to  the  law.  That  gave  me  confidence  in  the  house,  and  I  went 
to  them  and  made  arrangements  with  them  whereby  I  could  buy  of  them  in 
their  line  of  trade,  which  is  the  foreign  liquors  principally,  and  the  whiskeys. 

Q.  Having  supplied  yourself  with  your  stock  of  liquors,  what  was  your 
procedure  ? 

A.  I  will  state  also  that  I  supplied  myself  with  new  rum,  almost  entirely 
from  Lawrence  &  Son,  whose  rum,  so  far  as  I  can  learn,  is  the  best  in  the 
market.  Their  rum  runs  remarkably  uniform  and  pure,  and  hardly  varies  at 
all  upon  analysis,  and  my  customers  invariably  call  for  that,  although  there 
are  exceptions  where  men  desire  some  chaper  article.  My  alcohol  I  procured 
from  Graves  &  Co.  When  I  make  any  purchases,  before  concluding  the 
agreement,  I  look  around  and  see  the  article  I  want,  and  then  I  send  to  the 
State  Assayer  and  have  him  come  and  take  samples  from  the  cask  or  packages 
in  which  it  is  contained,  and  under  a  chemical  analysis.  He  takes  those 
samples,  and  returns  to  me  a  written  analysis  in  every  case,  and  no  article  is 
accepted  unless  he  certifies  it  to  be  pure  in  every  particular.  Unless  this 
certificate  is  that  the  article  is  pure,  it  is  not  accepted'  nor  used. 


694  APPENDIX. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  You  say  that  you  require  the  State  Assayer  to 
certify  to  you  that  the  liquors  you  are  about  to  purchase  are  pure  V 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  assurance  have  you  after  you  get  that  analysis,  that  you  get  these 
liquors  that  have  been  analyzed  ?  What  chances  are  there  for  the  company  to 
palm  off  upon  you  other  liquors  than  those  answering  to  your  analysis? 
What  means  have  you  of  knowing  that  you  get  the  liquors  analyzed  ? 

Q.  A  good  many  of  the  liquors  are. delivered  to  my  place  before  they  are 
analyzed.  Certain  kinds  of  liquors  are  almost  uniformly  alike.  Samples  of 
them  for  analysis  are  taken  from  the  packages  at  my  store ;  other  samples  are 
taken  from  packages  either  from  the  bonded  ware-house  or  at  the  store  of  the 
parties.  My  experience  in  this,  as  in  every  business,  is,  that  I  have  to  trust 
somebody.  It  is  impossible  to  do  business  without  trusting  them. 

Q.  Do  the  liquors,  after  you  get  them  into  your  possession,  undergo  any 
change  or  modificatiou  ?  Do  you  do  anything  to  change  their  character  or 
quality  ? 

A.  Nothing,  excepting  in  a  case  of  this  kind:  cider-brandy,  for  instance, 
which  is  used  for  bathing,  comes  in  at  a  higher  grade  than  pure.  If  there  are 
thirty  gallons  of  the  liquid  which,  by  reducing,  would  make  fifty  gallons  of  the 
ordinary  grade,  when  I  buy  it  I  pay  for  the  fifty  gallons  and  afterwards 
reduce  it. 

Q.     Reduce  it  by  adding  what  ? 

A .     By  adding  water. 

Q.     Nothing  else  ? 

A.  Nothing  else.  That  is  the  only  knowledge  that  I  have  of  any  addition 
to  any  article. 

Q.  Is  there  any  other  person  connected  with  the  Agency  whose  compensa- 
tion for  services  performed  depends  upon  the  profits  made  ? 

A.    None  at  all.     They  all  have  specified  salaries. 

Q.  So  that  no  agent  or  employee  of  yours  has  any  pecuniary  temptation 
to  change  or  modify  or  cheapen  the  liquor  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  And  I  do  not  think  that  they  have  any  opportunity  to  do  so. 
It  would  be  impossible  for  any  one  to  do  it  without  collusion  with  the  others. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  It  is  testified  here  by  the  agent  from  Hadley, 
Mass.,  if  I  remember  rightly,  that  liquors  from  your  agency  were  bad.  Do 
you  remember  whether  the  agent  from  Hadley  purchases  of  you  ? 

A.  Ho  purchases  of  me  to  some  extent,  but  I  read  somewhere  in  one  of 
the  papers  (the  newspapers  do  not  always  report  the  testimony  alike),  that  he 
testified  as  to  purchasing  brandy  of  me  at  a  certain  price.  My  impression  is, 
that  he  was  incorrect  in  that  statement.  One  paper  reported  him  as  buying 
brandy  for  $6.50  per  gallon.  He  has  bought  no  brandy  of  me  at  all  at  that 
price.  I  have  copies  of  the  bills  here,  and  he  has  bought  of  me  Medford 
rum,  St.  Croix  rum,  Bourbon  whiskey,  alcohol  and  Honeysuckle  gin,  and 
some  brandy.  He  bought  brandy  as  high  as  $10  per  gallon,  but  none  at  $G 
or  $6.50.  If  such  was  his  testimony,  it  is  incorrect.  Here  are  the  items  of 
what  he  has  purchased  [producing  papers].  I  have  never  heard  of  any  com- 
plaints from  him  in  regard  to  the  matter.  In  all  instances,  where  complaints 
have  reached  me,  I  have  written  immediately  to .  the  parties  to  give  me  the 


APPENDIX.  695 

cause  of  complaint,  to  send  me  samples  of  liquor,  or  have  them  analyzed 
themselves  at  my  expense,  and  give  me  all  the  information  they  could,  as  I 
was  desirous  to  know  if  there  was  anything  wrong  about  it.  I  have  never 
found  any  complaint  supported. 

Q.  Did  you  learn  anything  adverse  to  the  Agency  by  the  inquiries  of  the 
committee  of  which  you  spoke  of  having  been  a  member  in  1856,  or  were  the 
investigations  of  the  committee  for  another  purpose  ? 

A.  I  forget  the  exact  question  before  the  committee  ;  but  I  remember  it 
covered  an  examination  of  the  character  of  the  Agency.  Last  year  I  was 
upon  the  Committee  of  Investigation  in  regard  to  Mr.  Porter's  agency. 

Q.     And  what  did  you  find  ? 

A.  The  result  of  that  investigation  was  such  that  I  said  when  I  went  into 
this  office,  that  if  I  could  come  out  of  it  with  as  clean  a  record  as  Mr.  Porter, 
I  should  be  satisfied. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  What  is  the  amount  of  business  in  the  course  of  the 
year  at  the  State  Liquor  Agency  ? 

A.  The  amount  of  my  sales,  I  should  think,  would  average  about  a  thou- 
sand dollars  per  day,  since  I  have  been  in  office. 

Q.     Do  you  include  Sundays  in  that  estimate  ? 

A .    I  should  say  the  sales  were  about  $300,000  per  year. 

Q.     To  whom  do  you  sell  ? 

A.     To  the  city  and  town  agents. 

Q.  Do  you  carry  on  the  business  at  all  of  furnishing  by  the  pint  or  small 
measure  ? 

A.  I  do  not,  sir.  I  think  if  the  city  authorities  of  Boston  would  exercise 
the  right  they  have  under  the  law  to  appoint  an  agent  in  the  city  of  Boston, 
the  people  would  have  a  chance  to  know  whether  the  law  is  administered 
here  or  not.  They  have  always,  however,  declined  to  do  so.  The  statute 
provides  that  the  Commissioner  may  appoint  agents  in  the  city  of  Boston,  not 
exceeding  five  in  number.  I  have  been  endeavoring  to  find  the  right  man  to 
take  the  agency,  that  the  people  might  have  an  opportunity  to  test  the  admin- 
istration of  the  office.  Lately  Mr.  Reed  applied  to  me  to  see  if  I  would  find 
him  any  business.  He  seemed  to  me  to  be  the  right  man  for  the  agency,  but 
he  has  been  unable  yet  to  succeed  in  getting 'any  place  in  town;  but  inas- 
much as  I  have  had  frequent  calls  from  gentlemen  who  said  that  they  wished 
to  buy  in  accordance  with  the  law,  I  have  appointed  him  as  agent,  and  he 
sells  at  my  place  of  business. 

Q.    How  long  since  that  appointment  has  been  made  ? 

A.     About  two  months. 

Q.  Up  to  that  time,  then,  has  there  been  any  city  agency,  so  far  as  you 
know? 

A.  Mr.  Porter  had  a  nominal  agency  there,  but  I  guess  the  public  were 
not  aware  of  it.  There  was  not  much  liquor  sold. 

Q.     Have  there  ever  been  any  agents  appointed  by  the  city  government  ? 

A.  There  have  been  none  appointed  by  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen  since 
the  law  took  effect,  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Then  has  the  State  Agency  ever  availed  itself  of  its  power  to  appoint 
an  agent  in  this  city  until  you  attempted  it  ? 


696  APPENDIX. 

A.     Mr.  Porter  had  a  special  agent  in  East  Boston. 

Q,     But  none  in  Boston  ? 

A.  None  except  a  nominal  one  at  his  place  of  business  that  I  am 
aware  of. 

Q.     Did  Mr.  Porter's  agent  sell  much  ? 

A .     No,  sir.     lie  did  a  very  limited  business. 

Q.  Then,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  for  the  last  fifteen  years,  there  has  been 
under  this  law  any  place  where  liquor  could  be  obtained  for  medicinal  pur- 
poses in  Boston  ? 

A.  I  think  not.  I  think  the  public  did  not  know  that  Mr.  Porter  had  any 
special  agent  there  to  sell. 

Q.     How  long  was  he  there  ? 

A.  I  think  that  he  was  appointed  in  1859,  and  was  there  six  or  seven 
years. 

Q.  'But  it  was  never  known  to  the  public  that  there  was  a  place  at  which 
liquor  could  be  procured  ? 

A.     I  think  not ;  that  is  my  impression. 

Q.     Are  the  persons  in  your  employ  paid  by  salary  from  the  State  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  My  pay  is  by  commission.  I  have  no  salary,  but  I  pay  them 
a  fixed  salary,  which  is  charged  to  the  expense  account. 

Q.     And  that  which  is  paid  to  them,  does  not  come  out  of  the  commission  ? 

A.     It  is  a  part  of  my  commission. 

Q.  Then  the  whole  expense  of  the  Agency  clerks  and  sub-agents  is  to  be 
paid  from  the  commission  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  am  desirous  of  testing  the  system.  I  wish  to  put  you  upon  your 
guard,  and  to  state  that  I  do  not  impugn  anything  of  you  in  any  shape  or 
form.  As  a  part  of  the  system,  as  the  law  stands,  the  Commissioner  is  to  have 
entire  control  of  this  business.  He  is  to  buy  the  liquor,  to  employ  all  the  men 
or  the  help  that  is  necessary,  and  all  his  sub-agents  and  expenses  incurred  are 
to  be  paid  out  of  the  commission  ? 

A.  The  sub-agents,  of  course,  have  the  right  to  fix  the  rate  of  profit  at 
which  they  will  sell.  There  is  no  limit  in  that  respect.  I  am  limited  in  my 
commissions. 

Q.  I  used  the  wrong  word ;  I  did  not  mean  sub-agents.  The  law  pro- 
vides, does  it  not,  that  the  State  Agent  must  buy  his  liquor  and  employ  his 
help,  and  get  his  compensation  out  of  the  commissions  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now  again,  with  the  same  caution,  is  not  the  system  a  bad  one  in 
regard  to  the  administration  of  this  Agency  in  that  way  ;  according  to  your 
opinion  (and  I  know  you  will  give  it  freely),  is  not  that  a  bad  policy?  Is 
there  not  a  temptation  to  increase  the  aggregate  amount  of  the  commission  to 
one  who  is  desirous  of  making  money  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  looking  at  it  in  a  mere  pecuniary  light,  there  is  a  temptation 
in  all  business. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  strong  temptation  to  the  Commissioner,  however  upright 
and  honest  he  may  be,  in  order  that  his  own  personal  compensation  may  be 
increased  to  employ  as  cheap  help  in  the  Agency  as  he  can  get  ? 


APPENDIX.  697 

A.    If  that  were  his  only  motive,  he  might  be  so  tempted. 
Q.     Is  there  not,  therefore,  a  strong  pecuniary  inducement  to  a  man  who 
holds  the  place  to  employ  incompetent  and  cheap  help  ? 

A .  If  he  were  looking  at  it  simply  as  a  question  of  interest,  undoubtedly 
there  is. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  liability  that  he  may  get  men  in  the  Agency  that  are  not 
sufficiently  upright  in  character  and  standing  to  administer  its  affairs  hon- 
estly ? 

A.  There  might  be,  but  the  temptation  is  in  another  direction.  If  a  man 
wanted  to  continue  in  the  office  long,  he  would  want  to  employ  competent 
and  honest  help,  and  so  administer  the  business  as  to  demand  a  confidence 
that  would  enable  him  to  keep  the  office. 

Q.  Is  there  not,  then,  that  in  the  system  which,  if  a  man  looks  to  his  own 
compensation,  would  induce  him  to  cheapen  the  expense  of  the  Agency  ? 

A.     I  have  answered  you  before.     Very  likely  there  is. 

Q     How  many  persons  are  employed  in  the  Agency  ? 

A.  I  employ,  permanently,  four;  temporarily,  or  nearly  all  the  time, 
another  one, — from  four  to  five  in  all. 

Q.  If  the  law  was  entirely  enforced,  and  the  druggists  obtained  all  their 
alcoholic  preparations  there,  how  much  do  you  suppose  it  would  increase  the 
amount  of  the  business  of  the  Agency  ? 

A.  My  impression  is  that  the  enforcement  of  the  law  generally  would  not 
increase  the  business  anything  like  what  people  calculate.  My  impression  is 
that  the  law  does  have  an  effect  upon  the  drinking  habits  of  the  people. 
There  would  be  less  use  for  alcohol  for  medicine. 

Q.     Do  any  of  the  druggists,  as  such,  buy  of  you  at  present  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  They  have  no  authority  to  buy  of  me,  or  to  sell  it,  if  they 
did  buy  of  me. 

Q.  Have  druggists  throughout  the  Commonwealth  no  authority  to  buy  of 
you? 

A.     Not  unless  they  are  county  or  town  agents. 

Q.  The  question  that  I  desire  to  ask  you  is,  that  if  the  business  was  greatly 
increased,  it  would  not  require  a  proportionate  increase  of  help  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.  Now,  must  it  not  be,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  that  these  persons 
in  the  employment  of  the  Commissioner,  have  access  to  the  liquors  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     And  have  a  chance  to  get  at  it  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     It  is  impossible,  I  suppose,  to  carry  on  the  business  without  it  ? 

A.  I  would  not  carry  it  on  unless  they  had  access  to  it,  and  I  had  men 
there  in  whom  I  had  confidence,  and  to  whom  I  was  willing  to  give  access. 

Q.  Then,  in  your  judgment,  do  you  consider  the  system  to  be  sound  in 
principle  ?  Would  it  not  be  better,  in  your  opinion,  if  there  was  a  fixed 
salary  paid  by  the  State  to  every  man  employed  ? 

A.    I  have  advocated  that  amendment  some  time  ago.    I  desired  that  the 
State  should  furnish  the  capital,  and  the  Agent  be  paid  a  salary ;  then  the 
State  would  reap  the  benefit  of  the  law,  and  the  State  force  could  drive  the 
88 


698  APPENDIX. 

trade  there.     As  yet,  however,  I  hare  not  seen  any  evil  result  from  the  pres- 
ent system.     It  may  be  honestly  administered  by  an  honest  man. 

Q.  The  imported  liquors,  I  understand  you,  are  purchased  by  yourself  at 
Foster  &  Taylor's.  Have  they  always  done  the  business  of  the  liquor  agency 
in  Boston  ? 

A.  My  impression  is  that  they  have  substantially  furnished  the  liquors  ; 
they  have  so  far  as  I  have  any  knowledge. 

Q.     Will  you  state  the  amount  of  your  trade  with  them  per  year  ? 

A.     I  have  been  there  only  eight  months,  so  that  I  cannot  say. 

Q.     About  how  much  per  year  should  you  say  ? 

A.  I  think  perhaps  one-half  of  my  trade  is  with  them;  probably  to  the 
amount  of  $150,000  per  year. 

Q.  As  so  large  a  portion  of  your  purchases  are  made  from  them,  you  mean 
to  buy  of  them  as  low  as  the  market  prices  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  succeed  in  getting  liquor  as  low  as  the  same  article  could  be 
bought  elsewhere  ? 

A .  I  have  no  doubt,  that  with  the  exception  of  new  rum,  which  customers  can 
procure  from  the  manufacturers  quite  as  cheaply  as  they  sell  it  to  me,  that  the 
articles  I  sell,  adding  my  commissions,  are  sold  at  a  less  price  than  articles  of 
the  same  quality  can  be  bought  from  other  parties. 

Q.  You  feel  it  very^  important,  I  suppose,  to  drive  as  good  a  bargain  with 
them  as  you  can  ? 

A.  Certainly.  My  first  idea  is  to  be  sure  of  getting  a  good  liquor,  and 
then  buy  as  low  as  I  can  for  the  quality. 

Q.  As  to  the  quality  of  the  article,  you  rely  entirely  upon  the  statement 
of  the  Assayer  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir.     I  am  no  judge  of  the  quality. 

Q.    Your  reliance  is  then  entirely  upon  this  Assayer  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  excepting  the  confidence  I  place  in  the  parties  who  sell  to  me. 
The  analysis  of  the  State  Assayer  is  the  test  that  the  law  furnishes  to  me. 

Q.  When  you  buy  of  one  party  to  the  amount  of  $150,000  a  year,  and  he 
goes  on  year  after  year  with  this  selling  to  you,  and  it  gets  to  be  a  common 
business,  he  having  the  whole  trade,  there  being  no  competition,  is  there  not, 
from  the  very  nature  of  the  system,  and  the  mode  of  doing  business,  a  strong 
inducement  upon  the  part  of  the  house  furnishing  the  liquor,  to  furnish  a 
cheap  article,  and  thereby  increase  the  profit  ? 

A.  I  think  that,  if  they  could  have  the  assurance  that  they  could  furnish 
a  cheap  article  at  a  large  profit,  and  continue  to  receive  the  custom,  that  it 
might  be  a  temptation  to  do  so.  But  I  look  at  the  matter  in  a  different  light. 
If  I  was  the  party  selling,  I  should  deem  it  important  to  keep  up  the  standard, 
and  thus  insure  a  permanent  trade. 

Q.  Is  it  not  the  ordinary  custom  of  large  business  men  in  the  country  who 
deal  to  the  amount  of  a  hundred  and  fifty  or  two  hundred  thousand  dollars  a 
year,  to  select  a  particular  house,  and  continue  their  trade  with  them  for  a 
series  of  years  ? 


APPENDIX.  699 

A.  I  think  tbers  is  a  difference  among  men  in  regard  to  that.  I  know  of 
some  men  who  have  confined  their  custom  to  one  house  ever  since  I  can 
remember. 

Q.  Is  there  not  in  the  very  nature  of  that  mode  of  conducting  business,  a 
great  liability,  if  men  are  disposed,  to  look  after  their  own  interest,  and  be  a 
little  sharp  to  pursue  such  a  course  as  will  increase  their  profits ;  and  is  not 
the  door  open  for  them  to  do  so  ? 

A.  Of  course  there  is  an  opportunity  for  so  doing,  if  they  choose  to  do  so. 
There  is  no  trouble  in  cheating,  if  a  man  wants  to  cheat. 

Q.  Is  your  reliance  for  advice  and  counsel  upon  persons  who  are  interested 
in  the  preservation  and  enforcement  of  this  law,  or  do  you  consult  with  other 
parties  ? 

A.  I  do  not  consult  with  those  who  sell  to  violate  the  law,  unless  it  be  to 
gain  some  particular  information.  I  ask,  for  information,  what  house  in 
Boston  can  supply  the  agency  with  what  it  needs  ?  Has  such  a  house  char- 
acter and  standing  here,  and  does  it  seek  to  obey  the  State  law  ?  Those 
are  the  inquiries  that  I  make. 

Q.  Of  course,  you  would  not  take  advice  any  further  than  to  get  informa- 
tion ;  but  that  information  is  derived  from  those  quarters  ? 

A.     And  from  other  quarters  also. 

Q.    Yon  would  not  go  to  other  liquor-dealers — you  would  not  trust  them  ? 

A.  I  have  asked  information  of  other  liquor-dealers  in  regard  to  the  house 
with  which  I  am  now  dealing,  and  the  uniform  testimony  is  to  their  credit. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  this  house  has  been  in  the  habit,  ever  since  the 
existence  of  the  State  Agency,  of  making  an  annual  contribution  of  funds  to 
an  organization  of  the  State  and  for  the  support  of  the  temperance  paper  ? 

A.  I  never  knew  them  to  contribute  a  dollar  to  either  the  State  temper- 
ance paper  or  the  State  Temperance  Alliance. 

Q.     Do  you  know  that  they  did  not  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  they  did,  neither  do  I  know  that  they  did  not. 

Q.  Do  you  really  believe  that  a  system  like  this,  (with  a  temptation  to  the 
agents,  through  their  interest,  to  corrupt  the  liquor,)  can  be  honestly  adminis- 
tered, according  to  the  true  intent  and  spirit  of  the  law  ? 

A.  I  do  not  see  why  it  cannot  be.  I  have  not  yet  seen  any  reason  why  it 
cannot  be. 

Q.  You  are  aware,  I  suppose,  that  in  case  of  sickness  it  is  customary  for 
physicians  to  estimate  the  value  of  the  liquor  used  from  its  age  ?  The  price 
of  liquor  varies  greatly,  according  to  its  age,  does  it  not  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.  Is  there  any  means  by  which  the  State  Assayer  can  tell  anything  about 
the  age  of  liquor  by  any  analysis  that  he  makes  ? 

A.  He  can,  of  course,  answer  that  question  better  than  I  can;  but  my 
opinion  is  that  he  can.  He  may  not  be  able  to  tell  the  precise  number  of  years ; 
but  I  think  he  can  tell  the  difference  between  new  and  old  whiskey.  I  do 
not  know  ;  but  he  is  here  and  can  answer  for  himself  in  regard  to  that  matter. 

Q.     What  is  your  percentage  ? 

A.  Five  per  cent,  on  the  unbroken  packages ;  seven  and  a  half  per  cent, 
on  broken  packages. 


TOO  APPL.NJIX. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  You  say  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen  of  Boston 
have  never  appointed  an  agent  ? 

A.    Never  to  my  knowledge, 

Q.     The  law  says  that  they  shall  do  it,  and  yet  they  have  never  done  it  ? 

A .    Not  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.     How  much  of  the  liquor  sold  at  the  Agency  is  alcohol  ? 

A.     I  think  forty  thousand  dollars  worth. 

Q.  The  great  proportion  of  what  you  purchase  is  analyzed  from  small 
samples  taken  from  the  store  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  The  State  Assayer  is  here  and  can  give  you  particulars  of 
the  analysis. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     How  is  the  State  Assayer  paid  ? 

A.  He  is  paid  one  per  cent,  commission  on  the  sales  ;  "  not  exceeding  one 
per  cent."  the  statute  says. 

Q.  Then  if  the  sales  amount  to  three  hundred  thousand  dollars  he  will 
have  three  thousand  dollars  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  that  a  good  system  which  makes  the  salary  of  the  Assayer  depend 
upon  the  amount  of  sales  ? 

A.  I  take  it,  that  for  services  of  this  kind  the  amount  paid  must  be  in 
proportion  to  the  amount  of  service  rendered. 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  certificate  of  the  Assayer  secures  the  sale  of 
the  liquor,  does  it  not  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  object  of  the  law  in  creating  the  office  was  to  secure  a  perfectly 
harmless  and  pure  liquor  for  sale  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.  Is  it  wise  to  make  the  compensation  of  the  Assayer  depend  upon  the 
amount  of  sale  ? 

A.  If  I  had  confidence  in  a  man  I  would  as  soon  pay  him  in  that  way  as 
in  any  other. 

Q.     Sometimes  men  are  deceived. 

A.     But  you  must  put  confidence  in  somebody. 

Q.  But  ought  you  not  to  have  a  perfect  system  that  would  relieve  the 
State  as  much  as  possible  from  trusting  ? 

A.  I  think  that  a  man  who  could  be  tempted  would  be  tempted  as  much 
under  one  system  -as  under  another. 

Q.  Suppose  the  Assayer  had  a  salary  of  three  thousand  dollars  per  year, 
not  depending  at  all  upon  the  amount  of  liquor  sold,  he  would  then  have  no 
interest  in  giving  a  certificate  upon  liquor  examined.  The  Assayer  comes 
into  your  office  and  assays  twenty  thousand  dollars  worth  of  brandy.  His 
compensation,  I  understand  you,  depends  upon  the  sale  of  that  brandy  here- 
after? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  his  certificate  is  the  letter  of  introduction  of  that  article  into  the 
community  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 


APPENDIX.  701 

Q.  Has  he  not  a  direct  interest  in  giving  that  brandy  such  a  character  as 
will  secure  its  sale  and  his  own  compensation  ? 

A.     He  may  have. 

Q.  And  if  the  lot  assayed  turned  out  to  be  good  for  nothing,  he  would  get 
nothing  for  assaying  it  ? 

A.     He  would  reject  it  then. 

Q.  If  every  lot  of  liquor  that  he  accepts  is  sold,  he  gets  a  compensation ; 
and  for  every  lot  that  he  condems  he  gets  no  compensation  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  ever  take  samples  of  a  given  article  from  every  cask  which 
contains  it  ? 

A.  As  a  rule  we  do.  But  there  are  certain  articles  where  it  is  not  neces- 
sary. I  am  not  sure  whether  he  does  or  not  in  every  case.  In  ten  barrels  of 
Lawrence's  rum,  for  instance,  he  might  make  an  assay  every  week  and  the 
result  would  be  uniformly  the  same.  Perhaps  in  such  a  case  he  does  not  take 
from  every  barrel,  but  except  in  the  case  of  some  liquor  as  well  established  as 
that,  he  takes  from  every  barrel  or  package  a  sample. 

Q.     How  is  it  in  regard  to  brandy  ? 

A.  I  think  that  I  have  taken  but  one  lot  of  brandy  since  I  have  been  in 
the  office.  I  found  considerable  brandy  on  hand.  I  have  had  but  one 
package,  and  he  assayed  from  that  directly. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Some  persons  may  infer  the  quantity  of  liquor  sold 
from  the  total  value  of  your  sales.  How  does  the  cost  of  a  barrel  of  rum,  for 
instance,  compare  with  the  former  prices  ? 

A»    It,  is  now  $2.50  per  gallon  ;  formerly  it  was  forty  cents. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DR.  AUGUSTUS  A.  HAYES. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)    Is  your  residence  in  Boston  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 

A.    No.  20  State  Street. 

Q.    You  are  the  State  Assayer  ? 

A.    I  have  helcl  that  office  since  it  was  created. 

Q.  Will  you  state,  as  briefly  and  as  clearly  as  you  can,  the  method  of  your 
duties,  and  their  relation  to  the  question  before  us  ? 

A.  As  State  Assayer,  I  am  called  upon  to  perform  the  duties  connected 
with  the  analysis  of  the  spirits  of  all  kinds  sold  or  distributed  *at  the  office  of 
the  State  Commissioner.  In  attending  to  that  duty,  I  have  constantly,  since 
I  was  appointed,  drawn  my  samples  from  the  liquors  either  at  the  store  of  the 
Agency  or  at  the  warehouse,  either  the  Custom  House  warehouse,  or  the 
warehouse  of  Foster  &  Taylor.  Those  samples  have  been  subjected  to  careful 
chemical  analysis,  and  the  quality  of  the  liquor  stated  briefly  to  the  Commis- 
sioner. The  law,  in  its  terms,  provides  that  I  shall  accept  or  reject  the 
samples  so  obtained,  and  I  briefly  do  accept  or  reject  them,  stating  that  those 
accepted  are  pure,  and  that  those  rejected  are  not  fit  for  sale  at  the  Agency. 
On  accepting  the  situation,  (which  I  deemed  at  the  outset  a  responsible  one,) 
although  I  had  some  previous  acquaintance  with  the  subject,  I  found  it 
necessary,  to  enable  me  to  meet  all  the  possible  cases  that  might  occur,  to 


702  APPENDIX. 

study  the  subject  more  extensively,  and  I  have  studied  in  that  direction,  and 
have  made  almost  daily  observations  in  connection  with  the  analysis  of  liquors. 
The  samples  brought  from  the  Commissioner  are  subjected  to  analysis  in  my 
laboratory.  The  different  spirits  are  classified,  the  wines  also,  and  there  is, 
at  the  same  time  that  the  chemical  analysis  is  being  performed,  an  examina- 
tion made  into  the  quality  of  the  liquor,  the  quality  depending,  not  wholly 
upon  the  proportion  of  alcohol  present,  or  in  the  case  of  wine,  upon  the 
aroma,  so  to  speak,  of  the  wine,  but  upon  certain  characteristics,  which  give 
value  to  the  spirits,  and  which  must  be  necessarily  stated  in  considering  the 
place  of  the  particular  spirit,  in  regard  to  price.  In  order  to  place  this  more 
distinctly  before  you,  I  will  suppose  a  case  of  two  years  old  brandy,  which  is  a 
very  common  one.  I  will  suppose  it  to  be  a  sound,  well-made  brandy.  If 
that  brandy  has  been  properly  stored,  as  the  manufacturer  knows  how  to 
adapt  the  conditions  to  increasing  its  value,  at  the  end  of  ten  years  it  will  be 
worth  eight  dollars  per  gallon,  and  during  all  this  time,  nothing  has  been 
added  to  it.  We  are  obliged,  therefore,  to  be  prepared  for  cases  of  this  kind, 
so  as  not  to  place  in  the  category  of  two  dollar  brandy,  that  brandy  which  is 
richly  worth  eight  dollars.  In  making  the  price  of  a  brandy,  the  manufacturer 
takes  into  view  the  operation  which  it  undergoes  through  age,  and  a  moderate 
temperature.  The  effort  is  to  produce  in  the  brandy  a  kind  of  ether,  and  the 
quantity  of  that  ether  present  in  the  brandy,  modifies  its  action  upon  the  system, 
and  in  its  appeals  to  the  appetite  makes  up  a  large  part  of  the  value  of  the  brandy, 
as  will  be  seen  in  the  prices  of  old  as  compared  with  new  brandies  of  the  same 
manufacturer.  Another  point  which  is  taken  into  consideration,  and  which  is 
especially  important  when  a  wine  is  considered  in  relation  to  its  sanitary 
qualities,  is  whether  the  wine  was  or  was  not  prepared  from  the  juice  of  the 
grape,  either  wholly  or  in  part.  It  must  be  apparent  to  every  one  of  the 
Committee,  that  under  the  enormously  increased  consumption  of  wine,  without 
any  corresponding  extension  of  the  area  of  grape  culture,  a  very  large  pro- 
portion of  the  whole  wine  sold  is  not  produced  from  grape  juice,  and  deem- 
ing, in  its  medical  relations  especially,  that  point  of  importance,  I  have 
carefully  examined  into  the  manufactory  of  wine  in  other  countries,  and  have 
devised  those  checks  and  tests  by  which  we  are  enabled  to  distinguish  those 
wines  which  are  made  from  the  grape  juice  principally  (which  are  now  very 
few),  and  those  which  are  made  from  a  product  of  the  potato.  The  domestic 
spirits  which  are  also  important  from  the  amount  of  their  consumption,  are 
most  carefully  scrutinized  in  regard  to  their  age  and  maturity,  as  compared 
with  the  more  recent  spirits,  and  especially  the  presence  of  certain  poisonous 
compounds  which  belong  to  another  class  of  bodies.  I  may  say,  as  a  general 
remark,  that  the  utmost  care  is  given  to  these  examinations,  and  that  early 
after  the  commencement  of  my  duties  I  found  it  extremely  difficult  to  get 
spirits  of  the  high  standard  which  I  thought  were  required,  and  from  time  to 
time  it  has  been  difficult  since.  At  the  present  moment  I  may  say,  that  there 
is  a  very  much  larger  proportion  of  impure  spirits  and  unmatured  liquors  sold 
than  at  any  former  period  within  my  knowledge. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MCCLELLAN.)     Do  you  often  have  occasion  to  reject  spirits? 

A.    I  do,  though  less  often  than  earlier  in  my  practice. 


APPENDIX.  703 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Can  you  take  a  lot  of  wine  enforced  slightly  by 
brandy,  of  the  same  material  as  the  wine,  and  tell  whether  or  not  it  has  been 
enforced  ? 

A.     Very  easily. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  Much  has  been  said,  first  and  last,  upon  the  subject 
of  the  impurity  of  liquors.  Would  you  like  to  add  anything  upon  the  subject  ? 

A.  Iain  constantly  engaged  in  the  analyzis  of  liquors  that  do  not  come 
from  the  sources  of  supply  to  the  Agency,  and  I  have,  therefore,  an  opportu- 
nity of  comparing  the  liquors  that  are  being  sold  generally,  with  those  which 
are  sold  at  or  purchased  by  the  State  Agency,  and  I  can  state,  as  the  result  of 
my  observations,  that  the  liquors  generally  sold  are  to  a  very  large  extent 
sophisticated. 

Q.     By  which,  do  you  mean  manufactured  ? 

A.  They  are  manufactured  liquors,  either  changed  from  their  natural 
condition,  or  'sold  in  that  condition,  and  sold  after  their  value  has  been 
reduced. 

Q.  Do  you  find  that  remark  to  apply  to  what  are  called  low  houses  or  dis- 
reputable dealers  only,  or  does  it  also  apply  to  what  are  called  first-class 
houses  ? 

A.  I  think  that  it  applies  generally.  I  ought,  perhaps,  to  make  this  quali- 
fying distinction,  that  in  cases  where  the  liquors  of  retailers  have  been  seized, 
there  have  been  fewer  cases  where  liquors  of  tolerable  value  have  been  found, 
than  in  cases  where  particular  samples  have  been  analyzed  at  the  request  of 
physicians,  or  in  pursuance  of  some  particular  plan,  in  order  to  be  more  fully 
acquainted  with  what  was  for  sale  at  other  establishments. 

Q.     The  seized  liquors  arc  generally  worse  ? 

A.  They  are  generally  the  worst,  although  in  most  cases  there  are  one  or 
two  samples  which  would  be  considered  as  tolerable  liquor  ;  in  nearly  every 
case,  however,  nearly  every  specimen  would  be  rejected  as  impure,  or  as 
changed  from  the  original  standard. 

Q.  And  yet  these  are  seized  of  parties  who  are  currently  selling  in  the 
different  grades  of  trade  or  society  ? 

A.     So  I  understand. 

Q.  You  would  then  deem  the  samples  analyzed  as  very  fair  representatives 
of  what  is,  upon  the  whole,  proffered  publicly  to  drink  ? 

A.     By  retailers,  I  would. 

Q.  Would  you  feel  like  making  any  statement,  or  giving  any  opinion,  in 
regard  to  the  influence  of  these  liquors  upon  the  human  economy  ? 

A.  I  know  the  influence  of  liquors  upon  the  human  economy.  It  has 
been  a  subject  of  study. 

Q.  We  shall  be  very  glad  to  hear  any  statement  that  you  may  feel  at 
liberty  to  make. 

A.  I  will  briefly  state  here  that  the  immature  liquors,  or  the  new  liquors 
of  the  strictly  spirituous  kind,  exert  a  poisonous  influence  ;  and  that  apart 
from  their  alcoholic  constituents,  strictly. 

Q.  New  liquors  exert  a  poisonous  influence  aside  from  their  alcoholic 
influence  ? 


704  APPENDIX. 

A.  Yes,  sir.  The  remark  applies  to  immature  wines,  and  to  beverages, 
especially  where  they  are  compounded  from  immature  liquors,  which  are 
generally  chosen  for  that  purpose. 

Q.  Then  speaking  in  general  terms,  supposing  you  were  giving  to  a  body 
of  young  men,  counsel  in  regard  to  the  use  of  beverages,  even  including  wine, 
what  should  you  feel  called  upon  to  say  to  them,  in  the  way  of  counsel,  as 
to  the  safety  of  their  using  such  beverages  ? 

A.  I  should  state  very  directly  to  the  young,  and  in  the  same  words  to  the 
old,  that  the  use  of  spirits,  in  the  way  of  beverages,  and  in  this  climate,  must 
lead  to  a  diminishing  of  the  vital  sources,  and  doubtless  to  the  shortening  of 
life  ;  that  there  are  cases,  where  a  point  is  to  be  surmounted,  or  a  difficulty 
to  be  overcome,  when  the  use  of  spirits,  in  some  form,  may  enable  the  system 
to  pass  that  point  or  to  overcome  that  difficulty,  and  lead  as  other  medicines 
lead,  to  improved  health. 

Q.  But  you  would  restrict  such  use  strictly  to  what  might  be  called  exigen- 
cies in  the  condition  of  the  system  ? 

A.     I  would. 

Q.  You  used  the  expression,  "  must  lead  to  the  shortening  of  life  ; "  you 
did  not  use  a  stronger  term  than  you  intended  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  believe  that  is  the  result  of  all  the  knowledge  that  we 
possess  upon  the  subject. 

Q.  You  observed,  perhaps,  the  testimony  of  a  medical  gentleman,  upon  a 
former  occasion,  before  this  Committee  ? 

A.    I  heard  the  testimony  of  several  medical  gentlemen. 

Q.     Were  you  present  ? 

A.    I  was. 

Q.  As  our  object  is  the  truth,  and  not  the  criticism  of  those  gentlemen, 
are  there  any  further  remarks,  bearing  upon  any  point  of  their  testimony, 
that  you  feel  it  your  duty  to  submit  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  of  any.  I  think  that  Professor  Clarke  gave  you  the 
physiology  of  the  matter,  most  clearly  and  beautifully. 

Q.  In  your  judgment,  while  their  statements  may  have  been  fairly,  cor- 
rectly and  scientifically  given,  I  ask  you  whether  the  freedom  with  which 
they  spoke  of  the  healthful,  medicinal  and  alimentative  qualities  of  intoxica- 
ting beverages,  and  the  reticence  of  that  testimony  in  regard  to  the  damaging 
influences  of  alcohol,  were  fitted  to  leave  just  that  impression,  which  as  a  man 
of  science,  you  would  wish  to  have  left  upon  the  minds  of  hearers  ? 

A.  I  can  hardly  judge  of  that.  My  impression,  from  hearing  the  testi- 
mony, was,  that  it  applied  to  the  medical  use  rather  than  to  the  general  use 
of  spirits, — to  the  use,  rather  than  (if  you  will  allow  me  the  expression),  to 
the  abuse  of  spirits. 

Q.  Would  you  feel  like  expressing  an  opinion,  as  a  chemist,  that  the  detec- 
tion of  acetic  acid  in  the  breath,  was  a  just  chemical  test  of  the  problem, 
whether  or  not  alcohol  is  transformed  in  the  human  system  ? 

A.  I  think  that  if  the  vapor  of  acetic  acid  should  be  detected  in  the 
breath  of  a  person  taking  alcohol,  that  a  series  of  change  would  be  indicated. 
Alcohol,  we  well  know,  under  the  condition  of  the  breathing  process,  if 


APPENDIX.  705 

changed.     It  runs  through  two  or  three  mollifications,  the  final  result  of  which 
is  acetic  acid. 

I  think  that  there  was  one  gentleman  who  testified  in  regard  to  the  fat-pro- 
ducing value  of  alcohol,  and  I  thought  at  the  moment,  without  sufficient  reflec- 
tion, that  chemists  knew  no  way  in  which  alcohol,  pure  alcohol,  I  will  say, 
divested  of  its  oils,  can  be  converted  into  fat  in  the  system,  nor  is  there  any 
information,  so  far  as  I  know,  tending  to  establish  such  a  fact.  It  is,  I  think, 
a  mere  hypothesis,  without  a  chemical  basis. 

Q.     Do  you  now  speak  of  the  allegation  that  alcohol  produces  fat  ? 

A.     That  it  produces  fat  or  is  a  substitute  for  it. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  alcohol  never  becomes  fat,  or  is  substituted 
for  it,  or  do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  influence  of  alcohol  upon  the  human 
economy,  is  not  to  accumulate  fat  through  its  agency,  though  it  is  not  a  pro- 
duct of  it  ? 

A.  J  do  not  think  that  we  know  its  agency  in  regard  to  fat-forming  or  non- 
fat-forming tissues,  but  the  remark,  as  I  understand  it,  was  that  it  took  the 
place  of  fat  in  the  system. 

Q.  The  remark  was  several  times  made,  that  alcoholic  influences  take  the 
place  of  food,  by  arresting  the  disintegration  of  tissue,  in  view  of  its  being 
transformed  into  tissue  ;  does  your  observations  aflirin  the  proposition,  and  if 
so,  do  you  regard  it  as  a  circumstance  favorable  to  health,  or  the  reverse  ? 

A.  I  believe  that  it  is  allowed  by  all  who  have  made  any  investigations 
upon  the  subject,  that  alcohol,  like  a  variety  of  bodies,  does  arrest  the  disinte- 
gration of  the  tissues  for  the  moment,  but  that  is  an  unnatural,  and  not  a 
healthy  condition.  There  are  a  large  number  of  bodies  of  the  same  class  as 
alcohol  which  produces  this  effect. 

Q.  Is  the  disintegration  of  tissue  as  essential  to  health,  and  one  of  the  essen- 
tial conditions  of  continual  health,  as  the  formation  of  tissue  V 

A .     Hardly ;  we  have  no  life  without  death. 

Q.  What,  in  your  opinion,  would  be  the  results  upon  the  public  good,  if  all 
alcoholic  preparations  could  be  annihilated  ? 

A.  I  have  never  formed  any  opinion  upon  that  subject.  I  do  not  know, 
and  am  ready  to  confess  my  ignorance. 

Q.  What  would  be  your  conviction  as  to  the  influence  upon  the  public 
good,  if  all  alcoholic  beverages,  in  any  other  than  the  medicinal  sense  of  their 
use,  should  be,  in  the  main,  abolished  '? 

A.  I  think  that  in  this  climate  we  could  well  do  without  them.  I  think 
there  would  be  a  decrease  of  crime,  and  a  large  decrease  of  misery  and  idle- 
ness, and  of  all  the  ills  which  result  from  the  abuse  of  spirits  as  seen  at 
present. 

Q.  In  relation  to  the  test  of  acetic  acid  in  the  breath,  you  stated  the  con- 
dition upon  which  you  would  regard  its  detection  as  an  indication  of  the 
presence  of  alcohol.  Suppose  you  know  nothing  definitely,  beyond  the  fact 
that  you  find  indications  of  alcohol  in  the  breath,  and  indications  of  acetic 
acid  in  the  breath, — would  you  necessarily  conclude  that  the  acetic  acid  was 
produced  by  the  transformations  of  alcohol  ? 

A.     Not  unless  the  previous  circumstances  had  been  observed  so  well  that 
we  could  positively  state  that  no  acetic  acid  had  been  exhibited. 
89 


706  APPENDIX. 

Q,  Then,  as  a  fact  of  any  value,  chemically  speaking,  it  would  be  needful 
to  observe,  with  the  greatest  care,  what  had  been  taken  into  the  stomach  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.  So  that,  resting  upon  the  simple  fact  that  acetic  acid  was  detected  in 
the  breath,  it  could  not  be  considered  as  proved  that  alcohol  had  been  trans- 
formed ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

(2-  Have  you  fallen  in  with  a  p'amphlet  published  in  London  in  1866  by 
Dr.  Lees  ? 

A.     I  have  only  seen  a  short  review  of  it. 

Q.  You  have  no  opinion  upon  the  general  conclusions  therein  main- 
tained ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Your  opinion  is,  that  the  removal  of  alcoholic  beverages  of  all  kinds, 
would  be  a  great  gain.  Do  you  except  from  that  statement  wine  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  would  not  except  wine  in  this  climate.  I  would  make  the 
reply,  allowing  that  amount  to  be  accessible  which  the  physician  would  feel 
called  upon  to  employ  for  medical  purposes,  restricting  the  consumption  to 
that  limit.  I  think  there  would  be  an  increase  of  health,  and  an  escape  from 
the  evils  which  now  threaten  us. 

Adjourned. 


APPENDIX.  707 


TWENTIETH    DAY. 

TUESDAY,  March  26, 1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  the  hearing  of  testimony  on 
behalf  of  the  Remonstrants  was  continued. 

TESTIMONY  OF  PROF.  WILLIAM  S.  TYLER. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MIXER.)     Will  you  state  the  position  which  you  occupy  ? 

A.     Professor  of  Greek  in  Amherst  College. 

Q.  With  the  chief  questions  before  the  Committee,  I  take  it  you  are  by 
this  time  conversant.  Will  you  state,  as  briefly  as  you  may  be  able,  your 
views  in  regard  to  the  expediency  of  suspending  our  prohibitory  law,  and 
whatever  facts  you  have,  or  observations  you  may  have  made,  bearing  upon 
that  subject  ? 

A.  I  suppose  the  question  concerns  the  comparative  merits  of  a  license  law 
and  a  prohibitory  law.  During  more  than  thirty  years'  residence  in  Amherst, 
and  observation  of  the  effects  of  both  laws,  I  must  say,  that  my  associations 
with  the  license  law  are  not  very  agreeable  or  very  pleasant.  According  to 
my  observation  and  my  best  recollection,  the  license  law  had  to  be  changed 
every  few  years,  and  worked  about  as  badly  as  anything  could.  Certainly 
quite  as  badly  as  the  prohibitory  law  now  does,  and  without  the  possibility  of 
any  of  the  good  results  that  might  flow  from  a  prohibitory  law.  I  recollect 
very  well  that  it  had  to  be  amended  or  made  over  every  two  or  three  years. 
It  would  look  pretty  well  for  a  little  while.  They  would  make  a  new  law,  or 
amend  the  old  one ;  and  for  a  time,  perhaps,  it  would  be  a  check  upon  the 
sale  of  unlicensed  liquor.  The  liquor-sellers  were  shy  of  it,  and  were  afraid 
to  sell  for  a  little  while.  But  very  soon,  some  of  the  small  fish  would  slip 
through  the  net,  and  soon  after,  some  great  ones  would  break  though ;  and 
very  soon,  it  let  every  one  through,  and  the  net  had  to  be  hauled  up  and 
mended.  Then  the  same  experiment  was  tried  over  again,  with  precisely  the 
same  result.  There  were  constant  efforts  to  make  the  law  so  stringent  that 
it  would  prevent  the  sale,  and  so  that  it  would  execute  itself;  but  it  never 
would  execute  itself,  and  never  would  prevent  the  sale.  While  the  broom 
was  new,  it  swept  tolerably  clean  for  a  very  little  while,  but  as  it  grew  older, 
it  left  things  more  and  more  dirty,  until  at  length  they  became  very  dirty, 
and  became  a  stench  in  the  nostrils  of  the  community,  and  everybody  was 
glad  to  get  rid  of  it ;  the  friends  of  temperance  were  as  glad  to  get  rid  of  it 
as  the  rumsellers  were.  That  is  my  recollection  of  the  license  law.  No  law 
will  execute  itself,  I  take  it.  Certainly,  the  old  license  law  did  not  execute 
itself,  and  110  license  law  will  execute  itself,  in  my  judgment ;  and  I  predict, 
that  if  a  license  law  should  be  passed  by  this  Legislature,  it  would  not  be 
three  years  before  there  would  be  just  as  much  unlicensed  sale  of  intoxicating 


708  APPENDIX. 

drinks  as  there  is  now,  and  the  licensed  sale  would  be  just  about  a  clear 
addition  to  the  amount  of  sales  that  are  now  made.  Moreover,  the  sale  under 
license,  would  render  it  respectable,  and  would  introduce  it  into  a  higher 
and  more  respectable  class  of  society.  It  would  be  a  temptation  for  the 
children  and  youth  of  higher  and  better  families  than  are  now  tempted  to 
drunkenness.  And,  moreover,  it  would  extend  the  sanction  of  the  law  over 
it,  and  thus  justify  it  in  the  eyes  of  law-abiding  men.  In  my  opinion,  a 
prohibitory  law  can  be  enforced  just  as  well  as  a  license  law.  If  it  were 
enforced,  it  would  be  a  great  deal  better ;  and  my  impression  is,  that  the 
reason  why  the  liquor-sellers  are  so  thoroughly  excited  upon  the  subject  of 
the  prohibitory  law  just  now  is,  that  they  find  they  have  reached  the  end  of 
their  rope.  The  rope  just  begins  to  draw ;  and,  as  we  well  know, — 

"  None  ere  felt  the  halter  draw 
With  good  opinion  of  the  law." 

Q.  To  what  extent  do  you  judge  you  express  the  opinion  of  your  board 
of  instruction  and  the  government  of  your  college  ? 

A.  The  unanimous  opinion  of  the  officers  of  the  immediate  government 
and  instruction — that  is,  the  Faculty.  They  have  expressed  their  opinion  in 
writing,  by  sending  a  remonstrance  against  a  license  law  to  the  Legislature, 
quite  recently.  It  was  signed  by  every  member  of  the  Faculty,  except  Pro- 
fessor Clark,  who  is  here  and  can  speak  for  himself,  and  will  speak  for  himself 
when  he  is  called  upon. 

Q.  There  is  nothing  in  the  state  of  the  case  in  the  town  of  Amherst  that 
shakes  your  confidence  in  the  practicability  of  prohibiting  the  traffic  in  liquors 
as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  Nothing  at  all.  As  regards  the  sentiment  of  the  college  students,  four- 
fifths  of  them  have  likewise  signed  a  remonstrance,  which  has,  I  believe,  been 
presented  to  the  Legislature.  I  would  not  be  absolutely  certain  as  to  the 
exact  numerical  proportion,  but  I  think  it  is  four-fifths.  The  petition  for  a 
license  law  on  the  part  of  our  officials  was  followed  by  a  remonstrance,  which 
was  signed  by  certainly  two  or  three  times  as  many  names  as  were  signed  to 
the  petition  for  a  license  ;  and  having  canvassed  one  district  myself,  I  have 
had  a  good  opportunity  to  find  out  what  the  public  sentiment  is  in  relation  to 
this  matter,  and  I  find  that,  with  unexpected  and  gratifying  unanimity,  the 
friends  of  temperance  are  still  the  friends  of  the  prohibitory  law,  and  opposed 
to  a  license  law.  Some  of  them,  perhaps,  may  have  had  some  hesitation  in 
relation  to  the  execution  of  the  law,  in  consequence  of  the  existing  state  of 
things  in  the  Commonwealth,  as  a  whole ;  but  as  it  regards  the  judgment  and 
conscience  and  common  sense  of  the  old  friends  of  temperance,  they  were 
unanimous  in  giving  the  prohibitory  law  their  approval,  so  far  as  I  canvassed 
the  town.  I  was  not  prepared  to  find  so  great  unanimity  on  that  subject  as  I 
did. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  spoke  of  the  very  frequent  changes  of  the  old 
law  prior  to  the  passage  of  the  prohibitory  law.  Do  you  know  how  many 
changes  were  made  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  do  not. 

Q.     Do  you  know  what  the  nature  of  those  changes  was  ? 


APPENDIX.  709 

A.  My  impression  is,  for  the  purpose  of  making  the  law  more  stringent  as 
a  general  thing. 

Q.     Have  you  any  knowledge  as  to  the  precise  provisions  ? 

A.  I  have  not  looked  up  the  thing  in  detail.  I  am  obliged  to  say  to  the 
Committee,  I  have  only  my  general  recollection  on  the  subject. 

Q.  There  were  two  modifications  of  the  law— one  the  Act  restricting  the 
sale  of  intoxicating  liquor,  and  the  other  the  Sunday  law.  Do  you  know  of 
any  other  ? 

A.     I  have  no  other  in  mind  now. 

Q.  Have  you  anything  in  your  mind  now  as  to  the  character  of  that 
legislation  ? 

A.    Nothing  accurate  or  definite. 

Q.     Have  you  anything  in  general  as  to  the  character  of  that  legislation  ? 

A.  I  think  I  haye  a  very  intelligent  opinion  as  to  the  general  character 
of  it. 

Q.  How  accurate  is  your  knowledge  of  the  facts  upon  which  you  base  that 
opinion  ? 

A.     1  cannot  state  what  the  statutes  were,  I  am  free  to  say. 

Q.  Have'you  any  facts  now  in  your  mind  with  sufficient  clearness  to  enable 
you  to-day  to  base  an  opinion  upon  those  facts  ? 

A.  I  think  I  have,  to  base  an  opinion  upon.  I  think  I  have  the  opinion 
that  it  made  us  a  great  deal  of  trouble,  and  finally  became  offensive  to  the 
community,  who  were  all  glad  to  get  rid  of  it. 

Q.    What  was  the  nature  of  the  trouble  from  1842  to  1852  ? 

A.  The  difficulty  of  executing  the  law,  and  the  fact  that,  after  a  very 
short  time,  it  became  a  dead  letter.  That  is  my  impression  of  it,  and  I  am 
very  sure  it  was  so  in  Amherst. 

Q.  In  Hampshire  County,  for  a  great  many  years  before  the  prohibitory 
law  was  passed,  there  were  no  licenses,  were  there  ? 

A.  I  cannot  remember  how  long.  I  have  no  distinct  recollection  on  that 
point. 

Q.  Where  there  were  no  licenses,  was  there  not  a  prohibitory  law  practi- 
cally in  force  ? 

A.     I  do  not  remember  how  long  the  prohibitory  law  has  been  in  existence. 

Q.  Whenever  they  ceased  to  grant  licenses  in  the  county  of  Hampshire, 
could  any  liquor  be  legally  sold  there  ? 

A.  I  have  not  looked  over  the  subject  with  sufficient  care  to  answer  the 
question. 

Q.    You  do  not  know  the  fact  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  the  exact  fact.     My  impressions  are  of  a  general  nature. 

Q.  You  say  this  license  law  operated  during  that  period  very  badly.  Now, 
if  it  turns  out  that  during  the  ten  years  to  which  I  have  alluded,  there  were 
no  licenses,  and  a  prohibitory  law  was  practically  in  force,  what  is  the  value 
of  your  opinion  as  to  the  operation  of  that  license  law  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is  an  opinion  entitled  to  weight  with  all  who  know  me,  as 
based  on  general  grounds. 


710  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Everybody  knows  you  honorably,  sir;  but  you  say  you  have  your 
opinion  upon  the  ground  that  the  license  law  then  in  force  operated  so  badly 
that  it  became  a  stench  in  the  nostrils  of  the  community. 

A.  I  cannot  be  mistaken  in  my  opinion  in  regard  to  that  matter.  I  know 
there  was  a  license  law  at  the  time  to  which  my  impressions  have  reference. 

Q.     What  time  was  that  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell  the  year.  My  .memory  is  not  accurate  as  to  dates,  I  am 
obliged  to  say ;  but  I  am  very  sure  of  my  own  impression  as  to  the  state  of 
things  under  a  license  law  and  a  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  Can  you  give  your  impression  in  regard  to  any  time  within  the  ten 
years  prior  to  1852  ? 

A .     My  memory  for  dates  is  very  bad. 

Q.  Have  you  any  knowledge  as  to  the  operation  of  the  license  law,  or 
any  other  law,  during  the  ten  years  from  1842  to  1852  ? 

A.     I  cannot  say  I  have  any  distinct  recollection  as  to  dates  about  it. 

Q.  Have  you  any  impression  as  to  the  operation  of  the  law  one  way  or 
the  other  in  those  ten  years  ? 

A.    I  cannot  say  I  have,  in  regard  to  those  ten  years. 

Q.  What  sort  of  a  license  law  was  it,  about  which  your  opinion  of  its 
unfavorable  operation  is  so  strong  ? 

A.  A  law  licensing  certain  persons  to  sell,  and  prohibiting  others  from 
selling. 

Q.    How  sell? 

A.     Sell  for  use  as  a  beverage,  as  I  understand  it. 

Q.     Open  bars  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Does  your  impression  of  the  ill  effects  of  this  law  relate  particularly 
to  the  saloon  and  open  bar  traffic,  where  young  men  go  and  sit  and  drink  ? 

A.  My  impression  of  the  state  of  things  under  the  license  law  is  associated 
with  bar-rooms  particularly. 

Q.  You  are  not  aware  that  in  your  part  of  the  country  there  have  been 
no  bar-rooms  legally  open  from  1841  or  '42  up  to  this  time  ? 

A .     I  have  no  recollection  in  regard  to  dates,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that,  for  more  than  twenty-five  years,  there  has  not 
been,  in  all  Western  Massachusetts,  a  bar-room  or  tippling-shop  legally 
opened  ? 

A.    I  do  not  remember  the  length  of  time,  sir. 

Q.  Then,  if  you  speak  of  the  state  of  temperance  anywhere  during  the 
last  twenty-five  years,  when  there  was  no  license  law,  and  no  tippling-shops 
legally  open,  how  do  you  attribute  these  evils  to  the  effect  of  a  license  law. 

A.  I  have  a  distinct  recollection  in  reference  to  those  laws  when  they  were 
in  operation.  It  is  a  general  recollection,  I  must  say. 

Q.  You  mean,  you  have  a  distinct  recollection  of  the  period  when  the 
effect  of  the  tippling-shops  and  open  bars  was  so  injurious  ?  Is  that  the 
peri6(l  of  time  to  which  you  allude,  without  fixing  the  date  ? 

A.  Yes.  I  have  a  recollection,  likewise,  in  reference  to  those  laws  them- 
selves at  the  time  they  were  in  operation. 


APPENDIX.  711 

Q.     That  is,  at  the  time  tippling-shops  and  open  bars  were  permitted  by  law  ? 

A.    I  think  so. 

Q.     And  your  opinion  is  in  regard  to  that  time  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  else  was  there  that  fell  within  your  observation,  aside  from  these 
tippling-shops  and  open  bars,  that  was  objectionable  and  injurious  ? 

A.  I  think  our  young  men  obtained  intoxicating  drinks  and  were  intoxi- 
cated in  college,  at  those  times,  more  than  they  are  now. 

Q.  I  speak  of  those  places  where  they  got  liquor,  aside  from  the  bars 
and  tippling-shops  ? 

A .     I  don't  know  where  they  got  it. 

Q.  Have  you  any  distinct  recollection  as  to  the  evils  about  which  you 
testify  within  twenty-five  years,  or  does  your  recollection  relate  to  periods 
prior  to  that  ? 

A.  I  have  a  general  recollection,  extending  over  the  whole  thirty  years  I 
have  been  connected  with  the  college. 

Q.  You  have  spoken  of  the  peculiar  evils  you  have  observed.  Were  those 
evils  observed  by  you  within  the  last  twenty-five  years,  or  were  they  prior  to 
that? 

A.  My  recollection  is  quite  as  distinct  of  a  period  prior  to  that.  I  was  a 
student  in  Amherst,  and  then  a  tutor  for  two  years,  and  my  professorship 
commenced  in  1825.  My  recollection  is  more  lively  and  distinct  of  those 
earlier  days  than  of  more  recent  times. 

Q.  Have  you  any  facts  observed  by  you  within  the  last  twenty-five  years 
on  which  you  can  base  an  opinion  ? 

A.  Yes,  I  have  a  general  recollection,  a  recollection  of  comparative  effects 
that  I  can  rely  upon. 

Q.  Well,  for  these  last  twenty-five  years,  what  has  been  the  state  of  tem- 
perance ?  Has  it  been  better  or  worse  than  it  was  prior  ? 

A.  It  has  been  some  of  the  time  better  and  some  of  the  time  worse. 
There  have  been  great  changes,  I  should  think.  That  is  my  recollection. 

Q.     At  what  period  of  these  last  twenty-five  years  was  it  worse  ? 

A.    I  cannot  give  you  the  dates. 

Q     As  a  whole,  has  it  improved  during  the  last  twenty-five  years  ? 

A.  I  think  it  has  improved,  as  a  whole,  in  the  college  and  in  the  commun- 
ity. I  should  think,  decidedly,  that  very  great  improvement  had  been  made 
over  thirty  or  thirty-five  years  ago.  Taking  the  whole  period  of  my  connec- 
tion with  Amherst,  I  think  there  has  been  great  improvement  in  temperance. 

Q.  Has  there  been  any  improvement  the  last  fifteen  years  over  the  ten 
years  prior  ? 

A .  I  should  judge  that  during  the  larger  part  of  the  last  fifteen  years 
there  had  been.  That  is  my  impression. 

Q.  A  prohibitory  law  being  in  force  over  the  whole  twenty-five  years  in 
your  part  of  the  Commonwealth,  to  what  do  you  attribute  the  improvement 
in  the  last  fifteen  years  over  the  prior  ten  ? 

A.  I  have  the  impression 'that  the  prohibitory  law  was  better  enforced 
some  ten  or  fifteen  years  ago.  It  is  a  general  impression,  I  must  confess,  in 
regard  to  dates. 


712  APPENDIX. 

Q.     For  the  last  eight  or  ten  years  has  it  been  particularly  well  enforced  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was  pretty  well  enforced,  eight  or  ten  years  ago,  in  Amherst. 
I  am  sorry  my  recollection  as  to  dates  is  not  better. 

Q.     Liquor  is  sold  in  Amherst  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  I  think  it  is. 

Q.     There  is  intemperance  in  Amherst  now  ? 

A.  There  is  intemperance  in  a  low  stratum  of  society;  very  little  above 
that  stratum.  It  is  a  very  low  stratum,  and  furnishes  very  little  temptation  to 
respectable  young  men. 

Q.  Have  you  any  other  opinion  on  the  subject  than  that  such  legislation 
should  take  place  as  would  most  effectually  check  the  evil  ? 

A.  I'desire  very  much  that  the  Commonwealth  should  stand  upon  righteous 
rather  than  unrighteous  legislation,  and  should  base  her  legislation  upon  the 
right  principle  rather  than  the  wrong  one.  I  think  the  principle  of  the  pro- 
hibitory law  is  right,  and  the  principle  of  the  license  law  wrong.  A  license 
law  practically  says  that  by  paying  a  sufficient  sum  of  money,  you  have  the 
right  to  make  drunkards,  and  destroy  the  lives  of  men  by  selling  intoxicating 
drinks.  The  Commonwealth  thus  becomes particeps  crimhiis,  and  responsible 
for  it.  Whereas  a  prohibitory  law  rests  upon  the  same  just  basis,  in  my  judg- 
ment, as  the  right  of  the  community  to  protect  itself  against  the  cholera  or 
plague,  or  any  form  of  wholesale  evil,  vice  or  crime. 

Q.  If  legislators,  looking  over  the  subject,  come  to  the  conclusion  that  they 
cannot  entirely  prevent  it,  and  undertake  to  pass  laws  to  restrain  it,  do  they 
thereby  saction  that  which  they  permit  ? 

A.     They  sanction  that  which  they  license,  it  seems  to  me. 

Q.     Is  that  exactly  so  ?     Do  they  sanction  that  which  they  license  ? 

A.     It  seems  so  to  me. 

Q.  Well,  I  put  this  case :  Here  is  an  article  of  commerce  which  is  used 
in  the  community.  The  Legislature,  looking  over  the  ground,  think  it  ought 
to  be  checked — would  be  glad  to  restrain  it ;  and  believing  that  an  attempt  to 
entirely  prohibit  it  would  fail  of  any  effect  in  the  long  run,  they  conclude  to 
check  this  evil  by  some  law  or  other  as  far  as  they  can,  and  pass  such  a  law. 
In  that  case,  should  you  say  the  Legislature  sanctioned  the  sale  that  is  made 
under  the  law  ? 

A.  They  should  certainly  settle  with  absolute  certainty  the  question 
whether  a  prohibitory  law  can  be  executed,  in  the  first  place. 

Q.  Exactly;  that  is  the  first  question;  but  I  am  on  the  principle.  Do 
you  think  that  in  the  case  supposed,  they  sanction  the  sale  ? 

A.  I  cannot  suppose  a  case  in  which  it  would  be  right  for  the  Legislature 
to  authorize  the  sale  of  arsenic  as  an  article  of  food,  or  the  sale  of  opium  as  an 
article  for  common  use. 

Q.  In  legal  contemplation,  all  these  things  are  of  lawful  sale,  unless 
restrained.  You  don't  apprehend  that  the  licensing  of  a  man  gives  the  first 
right  to  sell  liquor  ? 

A.  Nothing  can  give  him  the  moral  right;  but  it  gives  him  the  legal 
right. 

Q.  Hadn't  he  the  legal  right  before  ?  As  long  as  it  is  property,  a  man  has 
a  right  to  sell  it,  under  our  system  of  government,  and  always  had ;  but  if  the 


APPENDIX.  713 

sale  produces  evil,  then  comes  in  the  right  to  restrain.  Now,  in  restraining, 
do  you  undertake  to  say,  that  the  Legislature  sanction  it,  and  that  the  right 
to  sell  comes  through  the  Legislature  only  ? 

A .  I  do  not  say  it  proceeds  from  them  wholly ;  but  I  say  they  thus  extend 
their  sanction  over  the  traffic — over  a  thing  which  is  wrong,  and  cannot  be 
made  right  by  their  sanction.  To  authorize  the  sale  of  opium  or  the  sale  of 
arsenic,  as  a  common  article  of  diet,  or  of  any  poison  as  a  beverage,  would  be 
so  far  forth  extending  the  sanction  of  the  government  over  the  sale  of  it  for 
that  purpose. 

Q.  If  I  get  your  idea  correctly,  you  are  not  particularly  wedded  to  any 
precise;  form  of  law,  but  whatever  law  would  best  effect  the  object  of  prevent- 
ing drunkenness  and  checking  intemperance  would  be  properly  commended 
to  any  Legislature,  would  it  not  ? 

A.  I  should  commend  most  heartily  a  decided  effort  to  execute  the  law; 
and  I  would  not  give  it  up  until  at  least  we  had  tried  it  more  faithfully  than 
TYO  have. 

Q.  You  have  made  a  comparison  of  the  prohibitory  law  with  a  license  law. 
Do  you  understand  the  law  that  is  proposed  here  and  against  which  you  were 
called  to  testify  ? 

A.     I  believe  I  understand  essentially  what  it  is. 

Q.  It  is  to  leave  it  entirely  to  the  towns  to  say  whether  the  prohibitory 
law  shall  be  enforced  or  not.  If  they  vote  not  to  license,  then  the  prohibitory 
law  is  in  full  force.  Do  you  understand  that  feature  of  it  ? 

A.  If  you  ask  my  judgment,  my  judgment  is,  that  it  is  desirable  to  keep 
the  prohibitory  law  on  the  statutes  until  we  have  made  a  far  more  thorough 
effort  than  we  have  yet  made  for  its  execution ;  and  my  belief  is,  that  it  can 
be  executed  just  as  well  as  a  license  law.  It  will  not  execute  itself,  any  more 
than  a  license  law,  but  it  can  be  executed  just  as  well  as  a  license  law.  A 
license  law  becomes  inefficient  after  a  few  years,  and  it  is  just  so  with  a  pro- 
hibitory law.  It  is  necessary  to  screw  up  the  machine  occasionally. 

Q.     Do  you  understand  that  it  is  proposed  to  repeal  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  very  definitely  what  gentlemen  propose. 

Q.  Your  opinion  is  formed  from  the  license  law  as  it  existed  thirty  years 
ago,  and  the  present  prohibitory  law  ? 

A .     In  great  measure,  that  is  it. 

Q.  And  therefore,  when  you  speak  of  the  fruits,  in  your  region,  of  a  pro- 
hibitory law  as  compared  with  a  license  law,  it  is  a  comparison  of  the  present 
prohibitory  law  with  the  license  law  of  thirty  years  ago  ? 

A.     It  is  more  definitely  that  than  anything  else. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DR.  AUGUSTUS  A.  HAYES,  (continued.) 
Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  If  I  recollect  right,  you  had  proceeded  so  far  in 
in  your  testimony  as  to  give  a  very  decided  judgment  against  the  use  of  alco- 
holic beverages,  either  by  young  or  old,  testifying  that,  in  your  judgment,  it 
would  necessarily  lessen  the  vital  forces  and  shorten  human  life.  I  would  like 
to  have  you  state,  if  you  feel  free  to  do  so,  the  result  of  your  scientific  obser- 
vations and  experiments  upon  certain  elementary  questions  involved  in  that 
general  proposition. 

90 


714  APPENDIX. 

A.  My  reply  to  your  question  referred  to  the  action  of  spirits  upon  per- 
sons in  health.  I  make  the  exception  of  all  those  cases  where  the  physician 
ordered  the  use  of  spirits. 

Q.  In  respect  to  the  effects  of  alcoholic  beverages,  as  the  external  exhibi- 
tion varies  at  different  stages  of  their  influence,  is  their  influence,  from  the 
beginning  on  to  inebriety,  homogeneous  ?  That  is,  is  it  a  tending  in  the  same 
direction  continually  ? 

A.  I  think,  if  the  amount  be  kept  in  view,  that  the  movement  is  contin- 
uously and  homogeneously  towards  intoxication.  Small  quantities  of  spirit- 
uous liquors  taken  into  the  stomach  may  not,  of  course,  advance  so  far  as  to 
produce  any  exhibition  of  intoxication ;  and  there  is  some  modification  pro- 
duced by  the  condition  of  the  stomach, — whether  it  be  full  or  empty. 

Q.  Suppose  that  the  stomach  be  empty,  or  nearly  so,  so  that  the  alcoholic 
influence  may  be  directly  upon  the  gastric  juice,  what  result  ensues  ? 

A.  There  is  derangement,  sir,  where  the  stomach  is  empty,  and  the  spirit- 
uous liquor  is  of  considerable  strength,  such  as  ordinary  spirit — rum  and  whis- 
key. Then  there  is  a  direct  action  upon  the  lining  of  the  stomach,  which  is 
not  resisted  by  what  is  termed  the  mucous  membrane ;  but  if  the  spirit  be 
much  diluted,  then  that  direct  action  is  very  much  modified  in  amount,  and 
the  usual  rapid  absorption  of  the  spirit  takes  place. 

Q.  Subsequently  to  which  the  secretion  of  the  gastric  juice  and  its  offices 
go  on,  in  general,  as  before  ? 

A.  Not  until  the  spirit  has  passed  from  the  stomach  proper,  which  it  does 
very  rapidly  indeed. 

Q.  Is  there  any  chemical  change  produced  in  the  gastric  juice  by  alcoholic 
influence  V 

A.  We  have  no  positive  knowledge  upon  the-  subject.  It  is  only  by  infer- 
ence that  we  speak  of  that. 

Q.  What  is  the  influence  of  alcohol,  taken  even  with  the  food,  upon 
digestion  ? 

A.  I  happen  to  have  made  some  observations  upon  the  action  of  wine, 
and  can  speak  more  directly  upon  that  point  than  upon  the  influence  of  spir- 
itd.  In  the  wine  districts  of  France,  especially, — and  I  think  the  remark  may 
extend  to  the  wine  districts  of  Germany, — the  peasantry  make  use  of  a  very 
coarse  kind  of  bread  ;  bread  which  I  should  think  the  human  stomach  would 
hardly  digest  without  that  addition  of  the  ration  of  sour  wine  which  is  con- 
stantly made  in  those  countries.  It  appeared  to  me,  from  the  observations 
which  I  made,  that  the  small  bottle  of  wine,  the  very  sour  and  very  slightly 
alcoholic  wine,  which  was  drank  by  the  peasantry,  enabled  the  stomach  to 
pass  over  the  difficulty  which  it  would  encounter  in  digesting  the  food.  The 
bread  was  made  partly  of  rye  and  partly  of  beans,  with  a  great  deal  of  husk 
in  it ;  and  the  nutriment  was  obtained  from  it,  I  think,  through  the  influence 
of  the  spirit  which  formed  a  part  of  the  ration. 

My  inquiries  extended  a  little  further,  to  the  subsistence  of  the  same  class 
of  persons  on  other  food.  The  opinion  I  have  in  regard  to  that  comes  second- 
hand, for  a  friend  made  the  observations,  not  myself.  The  ration  of  the 
French  soldier  is  well  known,  and  its  influence  upon  the  system  has  been 
most  carefully  studied.  Now,  in  the  Crimean  war,  these  soldiers  came  under 


APPENDIX.  715 

the  ration  of  the  British  soldier.  The  bowl  of  coffee  was  substituted  in  the 
morning  for  the  wine,  and  no  wine  or  spirit  was  used,  and  the  men  became 
much  more  efficient  under  that  ration,  than  under  that  to  which  they  had 
been  accustomed  as  soldiers,  taking  a  bottle  of  wine  either  once  or  twice 
per  day. 

I  think  there  are  other  cases  where  a  weak  spirit,  in  the  form  of  wine, 
which  is  a  very  compound  fluid,  taken  into  the  stomach,  enables  it  to  pass 
over  the  difficulty  which  it  may  meet  with  in  digesting  some  kinds  of  food. 

Q,.  Taking  our  own  country,  and  our  general  habits  of  diet  here,  and 
considering  the  fact  that  it  is  not  the  light  wines  of  foreign  countries  that  are 
used,  but  the  stronger  drinks  prevailing  here,  what  should  you  say,  in  general, 
was  their  effect  upon  digestion  ? 

A.  I  am  not  led  to  the  conclusion,  that  the  same  effects  would  be  observed 
in  our  climate.  Our  climate  is  exceptional ;  the  exposures  are  exceptional ; 
and  the  observations  which  I  made  were  made  in  wine  countries,  where,  if 
possible,  wine  becomes  a  natural  beverage. 

Q.  So  that  you  would  not  anticipate  the  same  beneficial  influences  in  our 
climate  ? 

A.    I  should  not,  from  anything  I  know  on  the  subject  at  present. 

Q.  In  general,  would  your  opinion  be  adverse  to  the  proposition,  that 
digestion  is  aided,  ordinarily,  by  the  beverages  that  prevail  in  this  country. 

A.  It  would,  in  this  climate.  In  a  healthy  system,  I  think  derangement 
would  follow  in  every  case  where  a  ration  was  formed  in  part  of  spirit. 

Q.  Your  testimony,  then,  is  that  you  think  the  use  of  liquors  here  would 
not  be  beneficial  to  digestion,  but  would  lead  to  derangement,  in  healthy 
persons  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir,  that  is  what  I  intended  to  express. 

Q.  Will  you  state  your  opinion  in  reference  to  the  deleterious  influence 
of  alcohol  on  the  human  system ;  that  is,  whether  it  affects  more  particularly 
one  part  than  another. 

A.  Alcohol  as  alcohol,  or  as  diluted  alcohol,  is  rapidly  absorbed,  and  does 
enter  the  brain  in  the  absorption.  The  effects  are  transient.  Experiments 
have  been  made  which  prove  that  fact — that  it  enters  the  brain,  and  that  it 
deranges  the  circulation  of  the  blood.  So  far,  we  know  ;  but  the  ultimate 
action  of  alcohol  is  unknown  to  us.  It  is  a  body  which  very  strongly  attracts 
oxygen ;  so  strongly,  that  it  burns  under  one  form  of  combustion  at  the 
natural  temperature.  At  the  temperature  of  the  body,  it  attracts  oxygen 
rapidly,  and  the  effect  of  spirituous  liquors  is  seen  almost  immediately  upon 
the  arterial  blood,  from  which  the  oxygen  is  withdrawn,  the  arterial  blood 
being  converted  into  venous  blood,  and  of  course  the  nourishment  of  the 
system  is  prevented  for  the  time. 

Q.  Then  instead  of  promoting  nutrition  (speaking  of  its  influence  on 
people  in  health),  it  prevents  nutrition  temporarily  ? 

A.  It  prevents  nutrition.  It  acts,  as  I  said  the  other  day,  and,  as  I 
believe,  you  have  other  testimony,  to  prevent  the  breaking  down  of  the  tissues, 
and  in  so  doing,  it  acts  simply  as  a  foreign  body.  There  are  a  number  of 
bodies  that  act  in  the  same  way. 


716  APPENDIX. 

Q.  And,  in  the  breaking  down  of  tissue,  it  prevents  the  healthy  restoration, 
or  building  up  ? 

A.  The  healthy  life  action.  I  cannot  reply  directly  to  the  question  on 
which  part  it  acts.  It  acts  so  instantaneously  that  it  includes  many  parts  in  its 
course.  The  first  action  is  on  the  stomach. 

Q.  My  question  really  aimed  at  this  point :  whether  there  was  any  special 
affinity  between  alcohol  and  any  parts  of  the  physical  system  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  the  word  "  affinity  "  can  be  used  there.  I  do  not  know 
that  it  acts  specially  upon  any  particular  part.  It  deranges  in  its  course  of 
absorption  both  secretions  and  vessels. 

Q.  What  diseases  would  you  expect  from  the  continuous  action  of  alcoholic 
beverages  ? 

A.  I  can  hardly  give  you  the  results,  from  any  observation  that  I  have 
made.  They  are  open  almost  to  common  observation.  The  general  break- 
down of  the  system  is  well  understood,  and  the  changes  produced  in  the 
kidneys  and  the  liver  both. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     You  are  not  a  practising  physician  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Are  you  a  Doctor  of  Medicine  ? 

A.    I  am  a  Doctor  of  Medicine. 

Q.     Have  you  ever  practised  ? 

A.  I  have  never  practised.  I  have  never  prepared  myself  for  practise. 
My  department  has  been  that  of  Medical  Chemistry. 

Q.  You  do  not  know,  then,  what  classes  of  disease  to  expect  from  the  over- 
use of  alcoholic  drinks  ? 

A.     No,  sir,  I  cannot  say  positively.     I  do  not  know  in  any  general  sense. 

Q.    Do  you  know  as  a  matter  of  general  scientific  knowledge  ? 

A.  As  a  matter  of  scientific  knowledge,  I  know  that  the  system  is  exten- 
sively deranged  ;  no  further.  Not  that  any  particular  disease  can  be  traced 
to  the  use  of  spirituous  liquors. 

Q.  And  you  do  not  know  whether  it  is  the  lungs,  thebrainrthe  kidneys,  or 
the  stomach  which  is  most  likely  to  be  injuriously  affected  ? 

A .     I  do  not,  of  my  own  knowledge,  know  those  facts. 

Q.  When  you  spoke,  doctor,  of  the  effect  produced  upon  people  in  disease, 
as  compared  with  the  effect  produced  upon  people  in  health,  where  is  your 
line  of  discrimination  between  sick  people  and  healthy  people  ? 

A.  The  ordinary  line,  where  the  system  becomes  deranged  to  such  an 
extent  that  the  patient  is  aware  of  it.  There  are  cases — very  few  indeed — 
where  the  patient  is  not  perhaps  so  well  aware  as  the  physician  is  of  the 
derangement ;  but  I  refer  to  all  cases  where  there  is  no  considerable  depar- 
ture from  the  normal  condition  of  health. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  an  entirely  different  theory  prevails  throughout 
the  whole  medical  world  concerning  disease,  from  that  which  used  to 
obtain  ?  Is  it  not  true  that  disease  used  to  be  regarded  among  men  of 
large  scientific  pretentious,  as  some  positive  enemy  introduced  into  the  system, 
whereas  they  have  learned  to  know  that  it  is  only  a  modification  of  health, — 
something  less  than  health, — and  that  the  line  between  health  and  disease  is 


APPENDIX.  7i7 

so  delicate  that  only  the  most  careful  clinical  observation  can  sometimes 
detect  it  ? 

A.  I  know,  sir,  that  these  theories  prevail;  and  medical  theories  are  not 
only  very  numerous,  but  extend  over  a  very  large  surface  ;  yet,  I  think,  when 
you  come  to  any  practical  view  of  the  subject,  it  is  easy  to  determine  whether 
the  patient  is  in  health  or  in  disease. 

Q.  That  is,  a  skilful  physician  can  determine  by  clinical  observation  ? 
Is  that  what  you  mean  ? 

A.  I  think  the  physician  can  discover  it;  and,  more  often,  the  patient 
himself. 

Q.    Now,  do  you  think  the  Legislature  can  discover  in  advance  at  all  ? 

A.  I  hardly  know  how  far  the  Legislature  can  go.  I  have  a  very  high 
respect  for  that  body,  but  I  do  not  know  how  far  they  can  go. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  read  Dr.  James  Jackson's  "  Letters  to  a  Young  Physi- 
cian," published  several  years  ago  ? 

A.     I  have,  sir,  and  possess  the  work. 

Q.  Do  you  agree  with  Dr.  Jackson's  observations  upon  the  subject  of  the 
use  of  these  beverages  ? 

A.  I  do  not  now  remember  exactly — many  years  have  passed — what  his 
conclusions  are.  But  Dr.  James  Jackson  must  be  accounted  as  one  of  the 
highest  authorities  who  has  ever  written  upon  the  subject, — if  he  ever  has  so 
written. 

Q.  You  would  regard  him  as  safe  and  wise  an  authority  as  there  has  ever 
been  in  Massachusetts  ? 

A.     Certainly,  sir ;  at  his  time  of  writing. 

Q.    Have  you  ever  read  Dr.  Carpenter's  book  on  Alcohol  ? 

A.  I  have  read  his  essays  as  they  have  been  published  ;  I  think  never  his 
collected  works,  other  than  as  a  mere  matter  of  reference. 

Q.  I  mean  his  book  on  the  "  Physiology  of  Temperance  and  Total- Absti- 
nance  ?  " 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  aro  aware  that  Dr.  "VVni.  B.  Carpenter  is  considered  the  physio- 
logical leader  of  what  may  be  called  the  total-abstinence  party  ? 

A .  I  do  not  know  that.  I  knew  Dr.  Carpenter  in  his  connection  with  the 
higher  departments  of  science. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  his  authority  is  almost  universally  appealed  to  by 
the  total-abstinence  party  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  have  never  mixed  in  any  discussions  on  the  point  myself; 
and  called  before  the  Committee,  and  very  desirous  of  giving  them  any  infor- 
mation I  possess  on  the  subject,  I  cannot  be  supposed  to  appear  here  as  taking 
one  side  or  the  other. 

Q.  Then  you  have  not  even  examined  the  subject  enough  to  know  what 
the  opinions  of  Dr.  Carpenter  are  V 

A.  Oh,  yes,  sir  ;  I  have  examined  his  opinions,  but  not  with  reference  to 
any  partisan  position  that  he  holds. 

Q.     Do  you  not  know  as  a  fact,  what  his  position  is  ? 

A.  I  do,  sir.  I  can  give  you,  perhaps,  in  a  very  few  words,  the  grounds 
for  some  opinions.  Dr.  Carpenter  has  been  considered  as  taking  one  and 


718  APPENDIX. 

rather  an  ultra  view  of  the  subject,  and  others  have  opposed  that  view.  The 
arguments  of  both  are  open  to  us,  and  it  is  on  the  arguments  that  we  form  our 
opinions,  not  on  the  statements  of  individuals  of  their  opinions.  Now,  it  has 
happened  to  me,  very  fortunately,  the  late  Dr.  Muzzey  being  an  instructor  of 
mine,  to  have  access  to  a  great  deal  which  he  had  compiled  on  this  subject.  I 
suppose  he  is  known  to  most  of  the  gentlemen  here  as  one  of  the  most  thor- 
oughly studious  medical  men  of  New  England,  with  a  large  practice,  an 
extended  field  for  observation,  and"  an  entire  and  thoroughly  honest  convic- 
tion on  his  part  in  regard  to  the  use  of  spirituous  liquors;  and  therefore  many 
points  which  would  otherwise  have  passed  by  without  being  observed,  have 
been  brought  to  my  knowledge  from  my  close  intimacy  with  him  during  the 
last  years  of  his  life. 

Q.     Dr.  Muzzey  took  the  most  extreme  views  in  reference  to  the  disease  of 
alcohol  and  alcoholic  drinks  ? 
A.     I  think  he  honestly  did,  sir. 
Q.     Do  you  agree  with  him  in  those  views  or  not  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  that  I  agree  with  all  the  views  that  Dr.  Muzzey  has 
expressed. 

Q.     Wherein  do  you  differ  from  Dr.  Muzzey  ? 
A.     That  it  would  be  very  difficult  for  me  to  say. 

Q.  Do  you  or  do  you  not  differ  from  Dr.  Muzzey,  and  if  you  do,  to  what 
extent  do  you  differ  from  him  ? 

A.  I  really  should  find  it  impossible  to  say  now  how  much,  without  recur- 
ring, more  than  I  have  time  to  do,  to  what  he  has  expressed. 

Q.  Which  should  you  prefer  to  put  forward,  among  the  great  writers,  as 
the  representative  man  of  physiological  science,  in  their  department,  Dr. 
Carpenter  or  Dr.  Muzzey  ? 

A.  I  think,  sir,  it  is  very  difficult  to  put  any  man  forward  as  a  representa- 
tive man.  There  has  been  a  vast  deal  written  on  the  subject  which  is  before 
the  Committee,  and  I  do  not  know  who  would  stand  first  or  second  in  the  case. 
I  should  be  unwilling  to  express  an  opinion  in  regard  to  the  standing  of  either 
of  those  gentlemen. 

Q.  Should  you  be  willing  to  have  the  Committee  led  by  the  opinions  of 
either  of  them  ? 

A.  I  should  hope  the  Committee  would  not  be  led  by  the  opinions  of  any 
man  or  any  set  of  men. 

Q.  On  a  question  of  science,  in  \vhich  the  members  of  the  Legislature  are 
not  experts,  how  do  you  expect  them  to  arrive  at  true  results  unless  they  can 
trust,  to  some  extent,  somebody  ? 

A.  They  can  easily  arrive  at  the  facts  on  which  opinions  are  based,  by 
inquiring  of  physicians,  at  present  standing  at  the  head  of  the  profession, 
which  they  have  an  opportunity  to  do,  and  from  those  facts  draw  their  own 
conclusions.  I  do  not  think  it  would  be  safe  for  the  Committee  to  take  the 
opinions  of  Dr.  Muzzey  or  the  opinions  of  Dr.  Carpenter,  or  the  opinions  of 
any  other  man.  And  if  they  wish  to  go  hito  the  literature,  of  the  subject, 
they  will  find  many  works  devoted  to  the  subject,  and  facts  stated,  and  from 
these  their  conclusions  can  be  drawn,  if  that  can  be  done  within  the  time  they 
can  give  to  the  subject. 


APPENDIX.  719 

Q.  Do  not  both  these  gentlemen  assume  that  they  reach  the  conclusions 
they  found  after  having  considered,  observed  and  weighed  a  very  large 
number  of  facts,  and  made  as  broad  a  basis  for  theorizing  as  they  had  it  in 
their  power  to  do  ? 

A.     Assuredly  they  do. 

Q.  Did  not  Dr.  Muzzey  come  to  the  conclusion,  not  only  that  the  sale  of 
intoxicating  drinks  should  be  entirely  surrendered,  but  that  the  use  of  all 
animal  food  should,  in  like  manner,  be  given  up  ? 

A .     I  do  not  know  that  he  ever  stated  his  opinion  in  that  form. 

Q.     Did  you  ever  read  his  last  book  on  Health  ? 

A.     Certainly.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Does  he  not  advocate  in  that  book  what  is  commonly  called  "  Gra- 
hamism  "  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  he  adopted  it  himself,  and  prolonged  his  life  through  it,  and 
spoke  from  those  convictions. 

Q.  Do  you  not  remember  that  when,  thirty  years  ago,  Dr.  Graham  lectured 
all  over  New  England,  particularly  in  the  colleges,  it  was  under  the  special 
auspices  of  Dr.  Muzzey,  who  introduced  him  to  the  colleges  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  know  he  was  introduced  by  respectable  gentlemen;  and 
there  can  be  no  question  whatever  that  very  great  benefit  was  derived  from 
the  change  in  diet  induced  through  hi.«  lectures.  But  it  is  very  wrong  to  draw 
any  conclusions  from  a  particular  ca?e.  I  have  no  doubt  that  alcoholic  drink  of 
any  kind  affected  Dr.  Muzzey  injuriously.  Late  in  life,  just  at  that  time  when 
every  man  wishes  to  prolong  his  days,  the  attempt  was  made  to  use  it  in  his 
case,  under  medical  advice,  and  it  failed  utterly.  But  I  think  individual 
cases  are  not  to  be  considered. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  be  understood  now  as  advocating  both  the  disuse  of 
alcohol  and  of  animal  food  ? 

A.  By  no  means.  No  question  has  been  asked  me  in  regard  to  the  entire 
disuse  of  alcohol. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  Dr.  Carpenter  himself,  in  his  seventh  proposition, 
after  having  rung  the  changes  on  the  objections  to  the  use  of  alcohol  in  all 
cases  but  that  of  disease,  at  last  admits  that  mild  alcoholic  drinks  are  useful 
for  a  large  class  of  persons  who  are  not  yet  in  a  state  of  disease  ? 

A.  I  think  that  there  is  some  statement  of  that  kind,  but  that  cannot 
influence  an  opinion. 

Q.     It  would  not  influence  your  opinion  ? 

A.  Not  the  simple  statement  of  that  fact.  He  states  it  simply  as  his 
opinion, — if  he  states  it  so  broadly  as  that, — I  think  not. 

Q.  [Reading.]  "  The  same  question  has  to  be  put  with  reference  to  a 
class  of  individuals  who  can  scarcely  be  regarded  as  subjects  of  disease,  but 
in  whom  the  conditions  are  essentially  different  from  those  of  health.  These 
are  such  as,  from  constitutional  debility,  or  early  habits,  or  some  other  cause 
that  does  not  admit  of  rectification,  labor  under  an  habitual  deficiency  of 
appetite  and  digestive  power,  even  when  they  are  living  under  circumstances 
generally  most  favorable  to  vigor,  and  when  there  is  no  indication  of  disor- 
dered action  in  any  organ, — all  that  is  needed  being  a  slight  increase  in  the 
capacity  for  preparing  the  aliment  which  the  body  really  needs.  Experi- 


720  APPENDIX. 

ence  affords  ample  evidence  that  there  are  such  cases,  especially  among  those 
engaged  in  avocations  which  involve  a  good  deal  of  mental  activity ;  and  that, 
with  the  assistance  of  a  small  but  habitual  allowance  of  alcoholic  stimulants,  a 
long  life  of  active  exertion  may  be  sustained  ;  whilst  the  vital  powers  would 
speedily  fail  ivithout  their  aid,  not  for  the  want  of  direct  support  from  them, 
but  for  the  want  of  the  measure  of  food  which  the  system  really  needs,  and 
which  no  other  means  seems  so  effectual  in  enabling  it  to  appropriate."  Do 
you  agree  or  disagree  with  this  conclusion  of  Dr.  Carpenter  ? 

A.  I  expressed  the  opinion  in  the  direct  examination  in  regard  to  that 
very  feature,  that  the  use  of  spirits,  especially  diluted  spirits,  does  enable  the 
system  to  overcome  a  mere  obstacle  of  that  kind ;  but  it  is  always  in  cases 
where  there  is  a  derangement,  of  course. 

Q.  You  spoke,  Dr.  Hayes,  of  the  necessity  of  being  governed  by  facts, 
rather  than  by  the  opinions  of  certain  gentlemen.  Now,  let  me  ask  you  if 
you  do  not  think  it  important,  when  undertaking  to  decide  a  question  of  this 
sort,  upon  a  supposed  basis  of  facts,  that  you  should  accumulate  as  large  a 
number  of  facts,  and  make  your  area  as  broad  as  possible,  and  not  undertake 
to  generalize  from  a  few  facts  simply,  like  the*  observations  of  one  man  ? 

/I.  I  do.  I  think  it  is  an  error  in  examinations  of  this  kind,  that  the 
deductions  are  from  too  small  a  basis  of  facts  ;  and  I  might  remark  further, 
that  the  deductions  of  the  English  physicians  are  generally  drawn  almost 
entirely  from  English  literature.  If  they  went  into  Germany  they  would  find 
a  much  larger  number  of  facts  reported  by  very  careful  and  accurate 
observers* 

Q-  Have  you  ever  examined  the  annual  reports  of  the  Registrar- General 
of  Scotland  upon  the  subject  of  health  and  disease  in  Scotland  ? 

A.     I  have  not,  sir,  specially. 

Q.  Then  you  are  not  aware,  that  within  the  last  three  years  the  Registrar- 
General  of  Scotland  has  reported  to  the  British  Government  that,  in  his 
opinion,  the  evidence  proves  that  the  moderate  use  of  alcoholic  liquors 
(including  whiskey,  which  is  largely  consumed  in  Scotland)  by  the  people 
so  improves  their  health  as  to  act  as  a  counterpoise  to  the  undoubtedly  inju- 
rious effects  produced  by  the  extensive  use  of  a  few  '?  Are  you  aware  that 
that  opinion  has  been  expressed  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  It  would  be  an  opinion  founded  upon  a  very  limited  number 
of  observations,  under  certain  conditions,  in  Scotland,  taking  into  view  the 
food  and  climate  both. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  whether  anybody,  during  all  these  many  years  of  con- 
troversy in  this  country,  has  ever  taken  pains  to  accumulate  the  statistics  and 
to  draw  a  scientific  deduction  from  them  concerning  the  effect  of  the  moderate 
and  temperate  use  of  these  beverages  ? 

A.  I  do  not  recollect  any  one  who  has  embraced  the  subject  so  largely  as 
you  have  suggested.  Dr.  Muzzcy,  as  you  well  know,  read  in  every  direction, 
and  two  or  three  others  in  this  country  have  been  engaged  on  this  subject ; 
but  what  progress  they  have  made,  or  how  far  they  have  advanced,  I  cannot 
say. 

Q.     They  never  gave  us  their  statistics  ? 


APPENDIX.  721 

A.  Yes.  A  gentleman  at  the  West,  whose  name  I  cannot  recall,  gave  a 
very  large  number  of  facts,  from  his  own  observation,  which  were  deemed 
very  important  at  the  time — some  seven  or  eight  years  since.  Whether  he 
has  pursued  the  subject  or  not,  I  do  not  know. 

Q.    You  do  not  possess  them,  do  you  ? 

A.  I  do  not,  sir.  He  is  quoted  by  Dr.  Muzzey  in  some  of  the  doctor's 
writings,  but  I  cannot  now  refer  to  it. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  the  statistics  of  mortality  in  this  country,  drawn 
from  the  census  of  the  United  States,  show  that  diseases  of  that  character 
usually  ascribable  to  alcoholic  causes,  are  greater  or  less  in  those  States  where 
prohibitory  legislation  prevails  ? 

A.     Ob,  no,  sir.     I  know  nothing  on  that  subject  at  all. 

Q.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state,  if  that  has  not  already  been  done, 
what  is  the  exact  result  arrived  at  in  the  chemical  analysis  of  brandy,  for 
sxample  ? 

A.  The  object  arrived  at  in  the  analysis  of  brandy  is,  first,  to  determine 
the  alcoholic  strength  of  that  brandy,  the  character  of  that  alcohol,  the  pres- 
ence or  absence  of  solid  matter  in  the  spirit,  (the  spirit  always  purporting  to 
have  been  distilled,  and  therefore  free  from  any  solid  matter,)  and  the  solid 
matter  found  determined  in  its  general  composition,  and  its  freedom  from 
injurious  or  poisonous  bodies  or  their  presence.  The  quality  of  alcohol  is 
determined  by  the  presence  in  it  of  certain  substances  produced  by  the  fer- 
mentation of  wine  and  the  nature  of  the  more  volatile  parts  of  the  liquor  with 
reference  to  age  or  maturity.  These  are  the  points  arrived  at  in  the  analysis, 
and  in  the  careful  analysis  of  a  sample  of  brandy  they  are  all  reached. 

Q.  In  the  analysis  of  brandy  or  other  spirit,  what  is  the  standard  of 
purity  ?  How  is  it  determined  ? 

A.  In  regard  to  brandy,  the  standard  of  purity  is  generally  a  sample  of  a 
known  quality,  and  the  departure  from  that,  which  of  late  years  has  become 
necessary,  is  also  estimated  in  regard  to  this  standard,  or  in  regard  to  none. 

Q.    What  do  you  assume  as  the  standard  ? 

A.  We  assume  as  the  best  standard,  that  brandy  which  is  manufactured  in 
small  quantities  in  France,  in  the  district  of  Cognac,  and  called  champagne 
brandy.  It  is  the  product  of  a  distillation  from  the  matured  wine  of  that  or 
the  neighboring  department.  That  is  the  highest  standard  of  brandy.  I  may 
say  that  that  standard  is  an  exceptional  one.  I  do  not  believe  a  sample  of  it 
has  reached  the  country  during  the  last  ten  years.  Then  we  have  other 
standards,  also,  such  as  Rochelle  brandy. 

Q.  Then  you  assume  that  you  never  find  that  kind  of  brandy  in  this 
country  ? 

A.  The  whole  of  the  finest  quality  is  made  up  in  the  manufacture  of  cham- 
pagne, which,  you  know,  is  a  factitious  production,  and  the  consumption  in 
France  rather  exceeds  the  production  there,  and  they  are  obliged  to  draw 
somewhat  from  Germany.  That  is  a  quality  never  met  with  here.  Then 
there  are  gradations,  and  those,  after  practice,  are  easily  understood. 

Q.    You  know  how  Cognac  brandy  itself  is  made,  do  you  not  ? 

A.     I  do,  sir. 

Q.     How  is  it  ? 

91 


722  APPENDIX. 

A.  The  Cognac  brandy  is  a  distillation  from  mature  wines  of  the  depart- 
ment of  Cognac. 

Q.     Different  kinds  of  wines  ? 

A.  Wines  of  that  department.  Like  all  other  wines  of  this  kind,  the 
slightest  departure  from  certain  conditions  involves  the  production  of  a  differ- 
ent kind  of  product.  That  particular  kind  of  brandy  stands  at  the  head,  and 
is,  of  course,  produced  in  limited  quantity,  as  only  a  certain  amount  of  the 
material  to  produce  it  can  be  found*. 

Q.  Assuming  that  you  can  never  find  at  the  State  Agency  any  pure 
Cognac  brandy,  what  do  you  look  for  ? 

A.  My  experience  has  not  been  confined  to  the  State  Agency,  by  any 
means.  In  the  statement  which  I  made,  I  gave  you  my  observations  abroad 
where  that  brandy  is  produced.  In  the  market  we  meet  with  brandies  of  a 
high  grade,  and  those,  of  course,  are  high-priced  brandies.  A  certain  price  is 
fixed  to  a  certain  quality  of  brandy.  Speaking  of  pure  brandy,  we  speak  of 
one  that  is  perfectly  pure,  possessing  the  quality  of  the  first-class  quality  of 
brandy  to  the  same  extent,  and  that  extent  regulated  by  price.  In  speaking 
of  the  quality  used  in  connection  with  the  observations  which  I  have  made,  I 
might  state  that  some  years  ago  the  price  was  fifteen  dollars  in  France.  Now 
an  offer  of  fifty  dollars  might  enable  a  person  to  obtain  some  of  it.  Now  we 
find  that  brandy  of  half-price,  would  be  very  much  more  than  half  as  to 
the  quality ;  and  this  is  the  way  we  determine  the  price  by  the  standard.  The 
standard  is  higher  in  proportion  to  the  price  than  we  should  expect  from  the 
consideration  of  the  price  itself. 

Q.     Does  analysis  enable  you  to  tell  these  high  grades  of  brandy  at  all  ? 

A.    It  does,  sir. 

Q.  How  does  analysis  enable  you  to  discriminate — that  is,  so  that  it  is  not 
perfectly  easy  to  imitate  ? 

A.    I  should  be  obliged  to  repeat  testimony  that  I  have  already  given. 

Q.  Can  you  determine  by  analysis  and  from  present  knowledge  of  brandy 
whether  an  agent  might  not  be  imposed  upon  both  in  the  quality  and  value 
of  French  brandy,  deteriorated  by  the  admixture  of  various  brandies  in 
France,  and  by  the  introduction  of  American  grape  brandy  ? 

A.  We  can  so  determine  by  analysis.  The  complete  analysis  of  brandy 
is  intended  to  meet  that  case  entirely. 

Q.    How  do  you  meet  that  ? 

A.  No  admixture  made  to  pure  Cognac  brandy  can  escape  detection  in 
analysis.  I  pointed  out  the  object  of  analysis  and  stated  that  we  did  meet 
these  points  in  analysis.  In  regard  to  the  adding  of  grape  brandy,  the  most 
volatile  have  not  the  same  proportion  as  those  from  pure  Cognac  brandy,  and 
we  are  able  to  determine  very  accurately  the  matured  brandy. 

Q.    You  are  enabled  to  determine  the  age  ? 

A.  Not  the  age,  but  the  maturity ;  for  it  is  possible  to  mature  a  brandy 
under  certain  conditions  in  a  short  period  of  time  as  well  as  in  a  greater 
length  of  time. 

Q.  Can  you  determine  the  purity  of  brandy  or  other  spirits,  when  mixed 
to  the  the  same  extent,  say  twenty-five  per  cent.,  with  another  and  inferior 
'quality  of  wine? 


APPENDIX.  723 

A.  .  Very  easily. 

Q.     That  can  be  done  ? 

A.     It  is  almost  daily  done,  sir. 

Q.  Can  you  by  analysis  determine  the  value  of  the  mixture  of  new  wine 
with  old  wine  of  the  same  origin  ? 

A.  We  can  determine  that  the  wine  has  been  mixed.  The  money  value 
is  a  matter  dependent  upon  the  market.  We  do  not  depend  on  that  exactly, 
but  we  can  determine  whether  old  wine  is  mixed  with  new. 

Q.     Can  you  determine  the  age  of  the  wine  ? 

A.     Not  in  years,  but  in  maturity. 

Q.     Its  apparent  maturity  ? 

.4.  Yes,  sir;  the  nianufacturers  of  spirits  have  a  mode  of  maturing  their 
wines  in  a  shorter  time  than  formerly. 

Q.     Without  affecting  the  market  value  ? 

A-     O,  no,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  say  that  the  maturity  is  the  same  ? 

A .  I  say  that  if  a  cask  of  wine  which  formerly  required  six  years  to 
mature,  is  matured  now  in  a  shorter  time  to  the  same  extent,  it  would  sell  for 
the  same  value. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Then  you  mean  to  say  that  you  can  tell  by  analysis 
all  these  conditions  which  are  necessary  to  affect  the  value  as  a  marketable 
commodity  ? 

A.  Not  to  apply  a  money  value  to  them.  We  speak  here  of  the  value  of 
a  beverage  as  compared  with  pure  brandy,  or  a  high  quality  of  wine. 

Q.     Then  aside  from  the  state  of  the  market 

A.  I  confine  my  observations  to.  the  value  as  a  matured  or  immatured 
wine. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Then  you  do  not  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  by 
analysis  you  can  discover  these  various  facts  which  go  very  far  to  determine 
the  value  of  the  article  as  a  marketable  commodity  ? 

A.  We  can  determine  these  facts ;  and  we  can  determine  the  value  of  a 
wine,  founded  on  its  maturity. 

Q.  You  have  an  idea  of  value,  and  perhaps  the  consumer  may  have 
another  idea  of  value  ? 

A.  I  take  the  consumer's  idea  of  value.  But  as  regards  the  money  price, 
that  you  know,  is  regulated  by  legislative  action,  but  it  has  a  certain  connec- 
tion with  the  quality.  We  find  in  the  market  wines  that  are  not  valued  so 
high  as  matured  wines,  but  are  more  valuable  as  commodities,  which  have 
an  artificial  consumption. 

Q.  Suppose  we  had  free  trade  in  wines  between  this  country  and  Europe, 
could  you  then  distinguish  by  analysis  one  grade  and  boquet  of  wine  from 
another,  to  the  extent  of  making  that  analysis  a  test  by  which  a  merchant  or 
a  consumer  could  buy  and  sell  ? 

A.  The  observation  in  regard  to  the  condition  is  applied  to  what  is  really 
determined  in  the  laboratory.  These  are  separate  matters.  I  do  not  think 
they  can  be  included  at  all. 

Q.     That  is  exactly  what  I  want  to  get  at. 


724  APPENDIX. 

• 

A.  What  we  determine  positively  in  the  laboratory,  does  not  refer  to  the 
value  of  the  commodity.  The  grade  of  these  wines,  the  value  of  one  compared 
with  another  one  of  the  same  kind, — that  is,  that  it  should  be  higher  or  lower, 
but  of  the  same  wine, — does  not  come  into  the  laboratory  at  allr  But  it  has 
its  influence  with  purchasers,  where  it  is  found  in  the  lower  prices.  But  that 
is  a  matter  for  the  merchant  and  not  for  the  chemist. 

Q.  Therefore  the  analysis  can  only  be  one  means  of  assisting  a  commercial 
man  in  making  up  his  own  intelligent  judgment,  in  doing  which  he  has  got  to 
consider  other  things  than  this  which  you  can  tell  him  ? 

Q.  I  do  not  feel  that  that  is  so.  The  analysis,  carefully  conducted,  is,  as  I 
have  said,  to  determine  the  value  of  the  quality  they  use.  Thg  merchant  has 
other  influences  on  his  mind  in  regard  to  prices.  These  we  do  not  enter  into 
at  all. 

Q.  Then  what  you  mean  by  that  is  this,  if  I  understand  you  correctly, 
that  it  does  not  make  any  difference  for  medicinal  purposes  whether  you  use 
one  kind  or  grade  or  stripe,  if  so  be  it  is  what  you  call  pure  brandy,  or  is,  to 
a  certain  extent,  made  up  from  it  ? 

A.    No  such  deduction  is  to  be  drawn. 

Q.  Then  be  kind  enough  to  state  what  point  among  the  various  positions 
you  do  take  ? 

A.  The  position  which  can  be  taken,  and  which  can  be  maintained  exper- 
imentally is,  that  matured  wines  have  a  higher  value, — and  a  much  higher 
value, — than  the  immatured  spirits.  Those  for  medicinal  purposes  are  valued  ; 
and  they  are  valued  in  proportion  to  the  maturity  ;  for  there  are  certain  prin- 
ciples produced  in  the  wines  and  brandies,  which  are  of  a  high  character, 
which  are  not  produced  in  the  direct  distillation.  As  an  illustration  of  that,  a 
brandy  which  is  valued  to-day  at  two  dollars  may,  after  a  few  years,  be 
valued  at  eight  dollars,  having  added  all  that  amount  in  price.  We  take  this 
into  the  laboratory,  and  we  find  that  there  have  been  certain  chemical 
changes ;  we  find  the  production  of  a  body  for  which  we  pay  a  high  price. 
It  is  so  in  the  case  of  wines.  Those  wines  in  which  a  certain  aroma  is  pro- 
cured, have  a  very  high  value.  And  we  find  a  wine  to  be  highly  aromatic 
which  has  been  well  matured.  This  connection  between  price  and  quality,  is 
determined  in  the  laboratory.  But  in  regard  to  medical  practice,  or  as  to  the 
taking  of  spirit  in  any  way,  I  wish  to  be  understood  as  stating  distinctly  that 
these  wines  which  are  matured,  have  a  very  great  difference  in  their  effect 
upon  the  system  from  those  which  are  immatured. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  FAY.)  I  understand  you  that  maturity  does  not  depend  upon 
age? 

A .  No,  sir ;  because  the  manufacturers  are  able  to  mature  their  wines 
quicker  than  formerly.  Formerly  it  would  be  a  matter  of  the  voyage  ;  now  it 
is  a  matter  of  a  warm  store-house.  Maturity  is  insured  in  a  much  shorter 
time. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Are  you  aware  that  it  is  a  quality  of  some  dis- 
tilled spirits  that  they  are  better  for  being  new  ? 

A.     No,  sir,  I  do  not ;  and  I  doubt  its  expression  in  any  form. 

Q.     Have  you  never  heard  of  that  ? 


APPENDIX.  725 

A.  When  the  exhibition  of  fusel  oil  is  desired,  new  spirits  are  sometimes 
employed.  But  on  the  other  side,  if  the  oil  is  taken  and  placed  in  water,  the 
same  results  would  be  obtained,  without  the  aid  of  spirits. 

Q.  Then,  if  I  understand  you  correctly,  it  would  be  possible  for  us  to 
organize  a  system  of  inspection  of  liquor  throughout  the  Commonwealth,  by 
which  the  present  selling  of  liquor,  either  by  license  or  otherwise,  could  be 
subjected  to  supervision  to  an  extent  which  would  reasonably  secure  the 
people  from  being  imposed  upon  ? 

A.     I  think  that  might  be  done. 

Q.     There  is  no  scientific  difficulty  in  the  way  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  When  you  examine  liquors  and  analyze  liquors  for  the  State  Agency 
of  the  Commonwealth  of  Massachusetts,  do  you  go  to  the  receptacle  of  the 
Agency,  and  examine  all  the  casks,  barrels,  hogsheads,  or  packages  in  bulk, 
or  do  you  receive  at  your  laboratory  a  little  bottle  or  vial,  containing  a  sample, 
and  analyze  that  ? 

A.  Where  the  number  of  packages  is  large,  I  take  a  certain  proportion 
from  different  portions. 

Q.     Do  you  mean  to  say  that  you  go  yourself? 

A.     I  go  myself. 

Q.     Dipping  in  here  and  there  ? 

A.  Suppose  a  case  of  twenty  barrels  of  New  England  rum.  It  is  well 
known  that  that  New  England  rum  was  filled  into  the  barrels  from  one 
receptacle.  Samples  are  taken  from  every  seven  or  eight  barrels.  The 
barrels  are  generally  the  most  defective.  From  these  the  samples  are  taken 
by  myself  and  taken  to  the  laboratory  in  quantities  sufficient.  There  are  some 
cases  at  the  Custom  House  where  the  barrels  are  so  piled  upon  each  other 
that  it  is  almost  impossible  to  get  at  the  lower  tier.  Then  the  higher  tier  is 
taken. 

Q.    Do  you  pursue  a  similar  course  in  regard  to  imported  liquors  ? 

A.     It  is  the  same,  sir.     I  spoke  of  going  to  the  Custom  House. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  You  made  an  incidental  reference,  in  answering 
a  question  in  the  cross-examination,  to  fusel  oil.  Is  that  easily  separated 
from  alcoholic  preparations,  so  as  to  be  employed  without  alcoholic  spirits  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  it  is  constantly  done,  and  constantly  for  sale. 

Q.  Is  it  on  account  of  the  fusel  oil  that  these  alcoholic  preparations  are 
used  in  the  cases  which  have  been  alluded  to  ? 

A.     That  is,  is  that  the  reason  why  impure  spirits  are  selected  ? 

Q.  My  question  was  upon  this  point.  I  understand  it  to  have  been  testi- 
fied that  new  spirits  are  chosen  on*account  of  the  fusel  oil  being  contained  in 
greater  proportion.  Now  I  would  like  to  inquire  whether  it  is  on  account  of 
the  fusel  oil  that  these  alcoholic  preparations  are  used  ? 

A.     That  is  the  agent  sought  in  the  prescription. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Do  you  understand  that  that  is  what  Dr.  Jackson 
gave  alcoholic  stimulants  to  little  children  for,  when  they  were  in  different 
stages  of  dentition  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  what  he  gave  it  for.  I  state  from  my  own  knowledge 
that  it  is  a  common  resort,  and  physicians  have  applied  to  me  in  relation  to 


726  APPENDIX. 

this  point.  I  state,  therefore,  that  they  do  use  the  new  spirits  in  consequence 
of  the  fusel  oil  in  large  proportions,  -When  they  prescribe  for  pulmonary  com- 
plaints ;  and  that  every  educated  physician  knows  that  the  effect  is  the  same 
when  placed  in  water. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  medical  men  do  not  prescribe  any  alcohol 
"because  it  is  in  itself  advantageous  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  but  the  fusel  oil  produces  the  same  effect  when  mixed  with 
•water. 

TESTIMONY  OF  Hox.  WOODBURY  DAVIS. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     You  reside  in  Portland  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  resided  there  ? 

A.     I  have  resided  there  between  eleven  and  twelve  years. 

Q.     Did  you  reside  in  Maine  before  that  ? 

A.    I  have  always  resided  in  Maine. 

Q.    You  have  been  an  interested  observer  of  the  movement  of  the  temper- 
ance cause,  and  of  the  temperance  laws  of  your  State,  I  suppose  ? 
,     A.    I  have  been  connected  somewhat  with  the  temperance  cause  from  my 
boyhood,  I  may  say,  and  through  all  my  active  life. 

Q.  We  hear  of  the  M#ine  Law  a  good  deal.  That  was  a  strict  prohibitory 
law,  I  believe.  Was  that  the  first  prohibitory  law  of  Maine  ? 

A.  The  laws  of  Maine  upon  this  subject  are  rather  the  result  of  growth 
with  constant  additions,  than  otherwise,  and  can  hardly  be  said  to  be  embodied 
in  any  one  statute.  Since  twenty  years  ago,  or  nearly  that  time,  they  have 
grown  up  into  their  present  system,  and  as  they  now  are. 

Q.     Suppose  you  give  us  the  history  of  prohibitory  legislation  in  Maine  ? 

A.  The  question  of  legislating  upon  this  subject  was  first  brought  before 
Our  Legislature,  in  definite  form,  as  -early  as  1837  or  1838.  The  matter  was 
at  that  time  referred  to  a  special  committee  of  the  Legislature,  of  which 
General  Appleton,  then  of  Portland,  was  chairman.  The  committee  took  up 
the  subject  and  went  into  a  critical  examination,  and  made  quite  an  elaborate 
report  on  that  subject,  recommending  a  change  of  legislative  movement  for 
the  suppression  instead  of  the  regulation  of  the  traffic — not  at  that  time 
reporting  any  statute,  not  at  that  time  eml^odying  any  definite  idea,  but 
recommending  as  an  object  of  legislation  -to  suppress  the  traffic  instead  of 
regulating  it. 

Q.     How  long  ago  was  that  ? 

A.  It  was  as  early  as  1837  or  1838.  I  do  not  remember  the  precise  year. 
I  know  it  was  as  early  as  that.  It  did  no?  result,  however,  in  any  definite 
legislation  at  that  time.  The  matter  continued  to  be  agitated  from  that  time 
forward,  without  any  definite  legislation — without  any  legislation,  in  fact, 
except  some  Acts,  from  time  to  time,  changing  the  license  system,  by  making 
it  more  stringent  and  restricting  the  authorized  sale  under  it.  It  was  not 
until  1846  that  this  effort  to  change  the  legislation  from  the  license  principle 
to  the  prohibitory  principle,  was  embodied  in  any  form.  In  1846  it  was  for 
the  first  time  done.  By  the  statute  of  1846,  all  sales  of  spirituous  liquors, 
except  for  medicines  and  the  arts,  were  entirely  prohibited.  Provision  was 


APPENDIX.  727 

made  by  thai  Act  for  the  appointment  of  persons  to  sell  in  the  various  towns, 
and  they  proved  more  extensive  than  they  subsequently  were  by  statute. 
The  statute  of  1846  was  a  prohibitory  law,  based  upon  the  same  principle 
and  going  to  the  same  extent  in  its  object  as  the  subsequent  laws  have  done. 

Q.  That  was  a  number  of  years  prior  to  the  enactment  of  what  is  techni- 
cally called  the  Maine  Law,  was  it  not  ? 

A.  The  Act  of  1846  was  in  operation  for  five  years  without  any  change 
in  the  law.  That  embraced  no  process  for  certain  seizures,  and  the  penalties 
were  very  different  from  those  subsequently  provided.  It  authorized  any 
person  to  sue  for  the  penalties  in  his  own  name  and  right,  and  provided 
various  machineries  for  its  enforcement,  which  were  in  the  small  towns 
employed  to  a  great  extent  throughout  the  State  during  the  five  following 
years — the  more  active  temperance  men  in  the  State  all  the  time  contending 
for  a  more  stringent  law,  and  for  more  stringent  provision  for  its  enforcement. 

Q.  Then  the  difference  between  the  law  of  1840  and  what  is  technically 
termed  the  Maine  Law,  was  chiefly,  if  not  entirely,  in  its  penalties,  was  it 
not? 

A.  It  provided  for  more  authorized  to  sell  than  the  subsequent  law.  Its 
penalties  were  different.  It  contained  no  provision  for  the  search  of  places 
where  liquor  was  sold,  nor  for  the  seizures  of  liquors.  In  these  three  respects 
it  differed  from  the  subsequent  statute. 

Q.  Then  the  law  of  1846  authorized  no  persons  to  sell,  and  those  who  did 
it  were  to  do  it  exclusively  for  medicinal  and  mechanical  purposes,  and  not 
for  beverages  ? 

A.     That  was  the  purpose. 

Q.     When  was  the  next  law  ? 

A.  That  was  followed  by  what  is  technically  known  as  the  Maine  Law,  in 
1851. 

Q.  We  should  like  to  have  you  tell  us  pretty  fully  how  that  law  has  been 
enforced  in  Maine.  There  has  been  a  good  deal  of  difference  on  that  point, 
you  have  observed.  We  would  like  to  have  you  give  an  accurate  account  of 
it,  so  far  as  you  may  be  able  ? 

A.  The  law  of  1846,  as  I  have  already  observed,  was  enforced  very  exten- 
sively in  the  former  towns — not  so  extensively,  by  any  means,  in  the  larger 
towns  and  cities.  The  law  of  1851  was  for  several  years  enforced  generally 
throughout  the  State,  not  without  -exceptions,  but  very  generally,  (and  the 
question  of  closing  up  all  public  places  of  sales  of  liquor.) 

Q.     For  how  long  a  time  was  it  so  enforced  ? 

A.  It  was  enforced,  perhaps,  more  and  more  vigorously  from  1851  to  1855. 
During  that  period  there  were  additions  made  to  the  law  to  increase  its  work- 
ing power,  as  it  was  claimed.  Changes  were  made  in  the  law  for  that  purpose 
from  1851  to  1855.  It  probably  never  was  enforced  any  more  vigorously  than 
it  was  from  1851  to  1855,  nor  any  more  extensively  than  it  was  then. 

Q.  You  say  the  public  places  of  sale  were  broken  up.  What  real  effect  did 
that  have  upon  the  amount  of  liquor  consumed  in  Maine  as  a  beverage,  in 
your  judgment? 

A.  I,  of  course,  have  no  means  of  knowing.  I  have  no  personal  knowl- 
edge in  regard  to  that. 


728  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Your  judgment,  so  far  as  you  can  form  an  opinion,  which  you  would 
consider  a  reasonable  opinion  ? 

A.  I  have  no  question  that  its  result  was  to  diminish  very  largely  the 
amount  of  intoxication.  My  opinion  would  be,  if  it  would  be  allowed,  that  it 
diminished  very  largely  the  use  of  liquors.  And  I  ought  to  state,  in  connec- 
tion with  that,  that  the  basis  of  that  opinion  is  that  of  visible  evidence  of  the 
use  of  liquors.  Some  might  not  infer  the  one  from  the  other.  I  only  wish  to 
be  understood,  that  the  consumption  of  liquors  was  very  largely  diminished 
and  my  opinion  is  based  simply  on  the  fact  that  the  external  evidence  of  the 
use  of  liquors  has  very  largely  diminished ;  and  I  have  my  opinion  upon  that 
fact. 

Q.  You  say  that  was  enforced  up  to  1855,  very  rigidly  and  quite  exten- 
sively. Was  it  not  repealed  in  1856  ? 

A.  It  was  repealed  in  1856,  and  substantially  a  license  law  was  substituted 
in  its  stead. 

(I.  Well,  that  license  law  was  repealed  a  year  after,  and  substantially  the 
old  law  reinstated  ? 

A.     It  was. 

Q.     What  was  the  operation  of  that  license  law  while  it  was  in  existence  ? 

A.    1  think  it  was  not  enforced  to  any  extent. 

Q.     Do  you  remember  how  many  they  licensed  in  Portland,  for  instance  ? 

A.  I  do  not  remember  how  many  were  licensed.  I  simply  know  one  gen- 
eral fact,  that  wherever  I  went  throughout  the  State  in  that  period  the  open 
sale  of  liquors  was  generally  resumed,  and  the  enforcement  of  the  law  was 
scarcely  known. 

Q.     Of  the  license  law  ? 

A.  Of  the  license  law.  There  would  be  an  occasional  prosecution  under 
it. 

Q.  After  the  prohibitory  law  was  reinstated,  was  that  put  in  force  quite 
generally  ? 

A.  It  was  generally  enforced  as  it  was  before,  but  I  think  not  so  thoroughly 
nor  so  extensively  as  it  had  been  before  it  was  repealed. 

Q.    But  quite  extensively  ? 

A.  It  was.  The  law  which  was  enacted  in  1857  went  into  operation  in 
January,  1858  ;  and  it  at  once  began  to  be  enforced,  and  it  has  been  enforced 
ever  since  in  the  small  towns,  with  some  exceptions  of  course,  but  generally 
in  the  small  towns,  and  quite  extensively  in  the  larger  towns. 

Q.  Was  there  a  suspension  in  the  enforcement  of  the  law,  to  some  extent, 
during  the  war  ? 

A.  I  think  there  was,  throughout  the  State,  in  the  large  places,  and  the 
agitation  incident  to  the  war  commenced  two  or  three  years  after  the 
law  was  re-enacted,  before  the  machinery  was  in  full  force  again.  Other  sub- 
jects attracted  the  public  attention.  The  other  matters  upon  which  men  dif- 
fered were  allowed  to  lie  in  abeyance  during  the  progress  of  the  war.  So  far 
as  I  know,  I  judge  it  to  have  been  so  generally  throughout  the  State. 

Q.  During  this  period  in  which  the  law  was  enforced,  was  there  a  diminu- 
tion in  the  statistics  of  pauperage  and  crime  ? 


APPENDIX.  729 

A.  It  was  so  under  that  system,  but  my  observation  would  not  extend 
beyond  a  few  of  the  larger  places  in  that  particular.  It  was  so  in  Portland, 
Bangor,  Belfast,  and  places  where  my  own  observation  led  me  to  lorm  an 
opinion. 

Q.     Did  the  people  of  Maine  ever  vote  upon  that  ? 

A.  When  it  was  re-enacted  in  1857,  the  friends  of  the  law  chose  to  submit 
it  to  the  popular  vote  and  it  was  done  ;  the  vote  being  taken,  I  think  in  the 
month  of  June,  in  the  summer  season,  not  at  the  time  when  there  was  any 
election,  when  that  was  the  only  matter  in  which  the  people  were  called  out. 
It  was  enacted  by  the  Legislature  in  order  to  avoid  any  question  about  the 
right  of  the  matter,  that  it  was  positively  to  go  into  effect  on  a  certain  day  ; 
and  it  was  submitted  with  the  provision  that  if  the  majority  of  the  voters  did 
not  vote  in  favor  of  it,  that  it  should  be  thereby  considered  as  repealed.  I  do 
not  use  the  precise  language,  but  that  was  the  provision  substantially. 

Q.  It  has  been  stated  here  on  high  authority,  that  it  was  never  the  judg- 
ment of  the  people  of  Maine.  I  would  like  to  know  the  fact  on  that  subject, 
if  you  please. 

A.  I  have  not  the  precise  vote.  Those  voting  in  favor  of  the  law  accord- 
ing to  my  recollection,  numbered  between  twenty-eight  and  twenty-nine 
thousand.  The  number  of  those  voting  against  it  I  cannot  state,  but  the 
number  was  very  small,  in  comparison ;  but  I  have  not  the  figures,  so  as  to 
give  the  vote  as  it  stood. 

Q-  The  vote  in  the  affirmative  was  a  number  of  times  larger  than  that  in 
the  negative  ? 

A.  It  was  five  or  six  times  as  large  as  the  number  of  those  who  voted 
against  it,  according  to  my  recollection.  I  did  not  anticipate  the  question,  I 
have  not  prepared  myself  with  the  figures. 

Q.    To  what  extent  is  the  law  enforced  there  now  ? 

A .  It  has  been  very  generally  enforced  in  the  State.  I  mean  by  that/ 
that  it  is  enforced  in  the  larger  part  of  the  cities  and  towns  of  the  State  ;  a 
very  much  larger  part,  so  that  the  towns  wherein  it  is  not  enforced  are  the 
exceptions. 

Q.    Is  there  much  moral  effort  in  Maine,  now,  on  the  subject  of  temperance  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  I  precisely  understand  your  question. 

Q.  Are  there  sermons  on  the  subject,  enforcing  the  duty  of  practising 
temperance  or  total  abstinence  ? 

A.  The  matter  is  one  which  is  being  discussed  extensively,  and  always  has 
been,  in  the  pulpit  and  by  the  press, — always  has  been,  excepting  in  the  years 
when  the  public  mind  was  taken  up  with  the  question  of  rebellion. 

Q.  Has  there  not  been  a  change  effected  in  the  last  Legislature  in  the 
law? 

A.    There  has  been. 

Q.    What  was  it,  if  you  please  ? 

A.  The  Legislature,  the  session  of  which  has  recently  closed,  established 
a  State  Constabulary  system  by  an  Act  copied  substantially  from  the  Massa- 
chusetts Act. 

Q.    And  increasing  the  penalties  also  ? 
92 


730  APPENDIX. 

A .  They  also  passed  a  new  Act  increasing  the  penalties,  so  that  every  viola- 
tion of  the  present  law  is  to  be  punished  by  imprisonment,  the  length  of  the 
term  varying  from  thirty  days  to  six  months. 

Q.     Do  you  recollect  the  vote  of  the  Legislature  upon  the  test  question  ? 

A.  The  Constabulary  Act  passed.  I  do  not  remember  the  precise  vota 
but  by  a  vote  I  think  of  ten  in  favor,  to  one  against  it. 

Q.    You  had  some  Democratic  votes,  of  course  ? 

Q.  I  do  not  know  how  that  was.  The  Act  increasing  penalties  and  mak- 
ing offences  of  every  grade  punishable,  was  passed  by  a  very  much  larger 
majority,  three-fourths,  I  think,  although  I  have  not  the  figures  with  me  ;  but 
that,  like  the  initiatory  Act  was  submitted  to  the  people  for  adoption,  and  is 
not  to  go  into  effect  unless  it  is  sustained  by  the  popular  vote  on  the  first 
Monday  in  June,  I  think. 

Q.     Still  I  should  like  to  know  what,  in  your  opinion,  that  vote  will  be  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  in  regard  to  the  result,  and  my  opinion  would  be  based 
upon  certain  facts  within  my  knowledge  or  substantially  the  same  ;  but  that  the 
vote  on  the  amendatory  question  will  be  substantially  sustained  by  the  popular 
vote,  by  a  large  majority,  as  decisive  as  the  original  vote,  I  have  no  doubt. 

Q.     Four  or  five  times  as  large  V 

A.    I  have  no  doubt  that  that  will  be  the  result. 

Q.  Is  not  that  a  very  small  vote,  compared  to  the  number  of  voters  in  the 
State  ? 

A.  The  vote,  I  think,  in  the  recent  election  of  both  political  parties,  was 
between  eighty  and  ninety  thousand.  I  should  think  that  not  more  than  one- 
third  part  of  the  voters  of  the  State  voted  affirmatively  for  the  law.  The 
vote  was  taken  at  a  certain  season  of  the  year  when  it  would  be  likely  to  be 
small,  and  being  on  the  day  when  there  was  nothing  else  to  be  voted  for,  of 
course  it  would  be  so  to  some  extent.  It  is  a  matter  of  which  any  one  could 
form  an  opinion  for  himself  as  to  the  reason. 

Q.  Was  it  not  generally  understood  what  the  vote  would  be,  and  would 
not  that  necessarily  prevent  many  from  coming  up  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  it  was  so  certain  at  that  time  as  it  is  now.  The  year 
before  the  law  had  been  repealed  by  a  combination  of  influences  that  resulted 
in  that ;  and  it  was  not  so  certain  what  the  public  sentiment  of  the  people  of 
the  State  would  be  as  it  is  now.  Still  I  think  the  friends  of  temperance  at 
that  time  felt  certain  of  the  result.  In  regard  to  the  amendments  which  are 
to  be  submitted  to  the  people,  my  opinion  would  be  based  in  fact  upon  the 
action  of  the  people  in  different  localities  where  that  question  has  been 
brought  in,  and  in  cities  and  large  towns,  where  the  law  has  been  vigor- 
ously enforced.  At  the  city  election  in  Bangor,  this  question  was  made 
a  test  question  at  the  recent  election  ;  and  the  friends  of  the  prohibitory  law 
re-elected  their  mayor,  who  has  been  for  years  a  practical  working  prohibi- 
tionist. They  re-elected  him  by  a  large  majority,  notwithstanding  an  oppo- 
nent of  the  same  political  party  was  run  against  him. 

Q.     That  opponent  got  the  Democratic  votes,  I  suppose  V 

A.  I  cannot  say  as  to  that ;  I  simply  know  the  fact  that  the  present  mayor 
was  elected.  I  know  that  the  opponent  was  a  man  whom  I  know  equally 
well,  and  a  man  of  the  same  political  party,  and  yet  that  the  other  candidate 


APPENDIX.  731 

was  elected  by  a  large  majority.  In  Portland,  during  the  war,  our  mayor 
was  a  man  not  specially  interested  in  the  prohibitory  law ;  but  I  was  a  mem- 
ber of  the  same  party  that  assisted  in  electing  him,  year  after  year,  by  com- 
mon consent,  we  thinking  it  better  not  to  make  that  a  test  question  during 
the  rebellion.  After  the  war  was  closed,  instead  of  re-electing  him,  a  year 
ago  this  Spring  the  friends  of  temperance  selected  a  man  who  was  a  well- 
known  prohibitionist,  and  elected  him  by  a  large  majority ;  but  during  the 
past  year,  the  law  has  been  very  thoroughly  enforced,  by  degrees,  in  Port- 
land. There  have  been  three  or  four  hundred  cases  of  search  and  seizure 
during  the  past  year,  and  several  thousand  dollars  have  been  paid  into  the 
municipal  court,  without  regard  to  the  other  cases.  All  the  places  of  sale 
known,  except,  perhaps,  some  apothecaries,  have  been  searched  during  the 
year ;  and  the  mayor,  and  the  police  acting  under  him,  have  in  this  way 
enforced  the  law.  The  question  being  substantially  a  test  question,  he  was 
elected  this  Spring  with  an  increased  majority.  The  same  is  true  in  other 
cities,  and  these  facts  bring  me  to  the  conclusion,  together  with  other  facts 
writhin  my  knowledge,  that  the  people  will,  by  a  very  large  majority,  sustain 
the  amendment  to  the  present  law. 

Q.  Has  it  not  got  to  be,  on  the  whole,  understood  by  friends  and  foes,  that 
prohibition  is  the  settled  policy  of  Maine,  not  to  be  uprooted  until  there  is  a 
very  great  change  in  public  opinion  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is  generally  understood  that  this  is  the  established  policy  of 
the  State.  A  large  number  of  the  larger  towns  in  the  State, — such  towns  as 
Waterville  and  Kennebunk,  embracing  the  seaboard  towns  that  are  not 
cities,  and  the  larger  class  of  towns,  within  my  personal  knowledge,  have 
taken  up  the  question  of  enforcing  the  law  and  instructed  their  officers  to  do 
it  at  the  public  expense  ;  and  the  matter  is  being  carried  very  generally  in 
that  way.  Notwithstanding  that,  I  ought  to  say  that  there  are  towns  in  the 
State,  both  large  and  small,  in  which  the  law  is  not  enforced. 

Q.     That  led  to  the  agitation  of  the  Constabulary  system,  I  suppose  ? 

A.     I  have  no  doubt  that  that  was  the  reason. 

Q.  We  have  had  a  misnomer  here,  I  must  say,  in  a  clergyman  appearing 
in  favor  of  the  license  law.  What  is  your  opinion  as  to  the  views  of  the 
clergy  in  your  city  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  of  any  clergyman  in  our  city,  with  the  exception  of  two 
Or  three  Roman  Catholic  clergymen,  who  are  opposed  to  our  prohibitory  law. 
I  would  not  wish  to  be  understood  to  say  that  there  are  not  others,  but  I  do 
not  know  of  any. 

Q.  AVhat  is  the  general  sentiment  of  public  men,  of  leading  men,  men  in 
public  life,  city  and  town  officers,  etc.  ? 

A.  That,  I  suppose,  would  be  indicated  by  the  adoption  of  the  Constabu- 
lary Act  by  our  Legislature.  I  was  with  a  committee  in  preparing  their  Acts, 
and  associated  with  the  members  of  the  Legislature  of  both  branches,  with  a 
very  large  number  of  whom  I  had  a  personal  acquaintance.  Of  course  there 
are  some  exceptions  ;  but  the  great  body  of  that  class  of  men  in  the  State,  in 
the  Republican  party,  are  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  Had  you  any  particular  difficulty  in  securing  convictions  in  your  State, 
or  juries  dissenting  where  the  facts  are  clearly  proved  ? 


732  APPENDIX. 

A.     There  are  sometimes  cases  of  disagreement. 

Q.  Cases  where  the  facts  are  all  plain  and  they  stand  out  from  their  dislike 
of  the  law,  insisting  on  their  right  to  judge  of  the  law,  etc.  ? 

A.  I  think  cases  of  disagreement,  under  these  circumstances,  are  rare,  but 
they  do  sometimes  occur.  For  nearly  ten  years  I  had  charge  of  the  criminal 
courts  as  well  as  the  civil.  Being  on  the  bench,  I  was  engaged  every  year,  to 
a  greater  or  less  extent,  in  the  trials  of  such  cases  as  came  into  the  Supreme 
Court.  In  those  counties  where  they- have  enforced  the  law  the  most,  there  is 
less  danger  of  disagreement ;  and  there  would  sometimes  be  cases  of  disagree- 
ment where  the  evidence  was  conclusive  (as  I  believe,)  and  satisfactory.  I 
have  often  known  such  cases,  where  there  was  a  disagreement,  to  stand  until 
the  next  term,  and  a  conviction  would  follow  on  the  second  trial. 

Q.     Do  they  allow  liquor-sellers  to  sit  on  the  jury  ? 

A.  We  have  a  rule  by  which  no  person  engaged  in  the  sale  of  liquor  shall 
sit  in  such  cases  as  a  juror;  so  that  if  it  appear  by  the  answers  or  otherwise 
that  he  is  a  dealer  in  liquors,  he  is  excluded. 

Q.  You  consider,  as  a  jurist,  that  it  is  a  wise  and  proper  difference,  I 
suppose  ? 

A.  I  personally  have  no  doubt  in  regard  to  that.  It  would  be  a  question 
that  would  hardly  seem  to  admit  of  any  doubt. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  were  inquired  of  in  reference  to  the  license 
law — I  mean  the  Neal  Dow  law  ? 

A.  That  was  the  law  of  1851.  Mr.  Dow  has  been  active  in  securing  other 
laws,  but  that  was  more  particularly  connected  with  his  name. 

Q.  Was  the  consequent  legislation  in  passing  that  law  understood  to  be  in 
favor  of  it,  or  was  a  majority  brought  to  bear  upon  it  by  a  combination  of 
interests  or  by  political  considerations  ? 

A.  My  own  opinion  would  be,  that  the  majority  of  the  Legislature  that 
originally  enacted  that  law,  so  to  speak,  did  not  have  faith  in  it.  It  was 
enacted  in  1851,  before  the  present  parties,  as  they  now  stand,  were  organized, 
and  when  the  Democratic  party  had  the  majority  in  that  State  ;  but  I  should, 
perhaps,  say  this  :  that  it  was  enacted  as-  the  result  of  the  agitation  on  this 
subject  by  leading  temperance  men,  who  were  influential  men  in  both  parties  5 
and  my  view  would  be,  that  one  portion  of  the  Legislature  was  strongly  in 
favor  and  the  other  portion  of  the  Legislature  did  not  exactly  have  faith,  but 
was  willing  to  say  to  those  of  us  who  wanted  it,  (and  I  was  one  of  those 
who  wanted  it,)  we  are  willing  you  should  take  this  and  try  it. 

Q.  So  far  as  this  is  concerned,  from  their  acts,  it  is  not  an  indication  of 
where  the  sentiment  of  the  majority  of  the  people  was.  There  may  have 
been  a  majority  voting  for  it,  but  was  that  Act  itself  a  sure  indication  of  what 
the  opinion  of  the  people  was  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was  a  sure  indication  that  the  sentiment  of  the  people  was  in 
favor  of  having  a  law  for  suppressing  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors,  but  as 
to  whether  this  particular  mode  was  considered  the  best,  I  think  it  was  an 
experiment. 

Q.    What  is  the  number  of  legal  voters  in  the  State  of  Maine  ? 

A.     It  is  now  one  hundred  and  ten  thousand,  more  or  less  ? 

Q.     At  the  time  that  this  was  submitted  to  the  people,  what  was  the  number  ? 


APPENDIX.  733 

A.  It  must  have  been  ten  thousand  less,  I  should  judge,  than  now ;  though 
I  should  not  wish  to  be  understood  as  stating  very  nearly. 

Q.  So  far  as  the  opinion  of  the  people  is  concerned,  there  was  a  vote  of 
about  twenty-eight  thousand,  was  there  ? 

A.  That  was  about  the  number,  I  think;  between  twenty-eight  and 
twenty-nine  thousand.  I  only  speak  from  recollection. 

Q.  We  can  go,  then,  no  farther  on  that,  than  to  say  that  the  only  action  of 
the  people  of  Maine  having  an  opportunity  to  record  their  votes,  on  what  is 
known  as  the  Maine  Law,  was  a  vote  of  twenty-eight  or  twenty-nine  thousand 
in  favor  of  the  law,  out  of  one  hundred  thousand  voters.  I  do  not  ask  for 
opinion,  but  any  action  expressed  by  the  people  when  they  had  an  opportu- 
nity to  express  it,  cither  yea  or  nay,  without  any  other  opinion  connected 
with  it.  Have  you  any  other  instances,  except  this  case  of  twenty-eight  or 
twenty-nine  thousand  out  of  a  hundred  thousand  ? 

A.    If  you  mean  to  ask  whether  it  has  entered  into  our  popular  elections — 

Q.  No,  sir ;  I  understand  that ;  but  where  the  people  have  had  an  oppor- 
tunity of  expressing  their  opinion,  and  where  that  was  the  only  principle  ? 

A.     There  has  been  no  other  popular  vote  on  that  subject. 

Q.  While  we  all  know  that  in  a  popular  election  a  great  many  other  mat- 
ters may  come  in,  personal  dislikes  and  the  like,  is  that  a  fair  test  of  the  public 
sentiment  on  a  particular  law  where  the  vote  Is  yea  or  nay  ? 

A.  I  should,  perhaps,  state  a  fact  which  others  know  as  well  as  myself, 
that  since  1856,  when  there  was  a  reaction  that  lasted  but  one  year,  the  party 
known  as  the  Republican  party  have  had  a  very  large  majority  in  our  State 
always.  In  connection  with  that,  the  only  way  in  which  I  could  answer  your 
question  would  be  this :  that  no  man  could  have  received  a  nomination  from 
that  party  who  was  not  known  to  be  favorable  to  the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  And  less  than  a  majority  of  the  people  and  less  than  a  majority  of  the 
party,  might,  if  they  were  disposed,  secure  the  nomination  of  any  man  ? 

A.    It  might  be  done. 

Q.  I  would  inquire  whether  the  use  of  liquor  having  diminished,  you  infer 
it  if  I  understand  you  aright,  from  the  closing  of  the  open  places  of  sale  ?  I 
understood  you  to  answer  a  question  by  Mr.  Spooner,  that  you  thought  that 
the  use  of  intoxicating  liquor  was  diminished  ? 

A.    I  expressed  such  an  opinion. 

Q.  Was  that  opinion  based  chiefly  on  the  fact  that  within  your  observa- 
tion, public  places  of  sale  seem  to  be  closed? 

A.  It  was  only  in  part  upon  that ;  perhaps  less  upon  that  than  other  facts. 
There  is  very  much  less  indication  in  the  streets  and  a  very  much  less  number 
of  arrests  in  our  city ;  and  in  all  those  evidences  where  there  is  any  public 
manifestation,  these  public  manifestations  were  very  largely  diminished. 

Q.     Do  you  know  anything  about  the  secret  sale  ? 

A.    I  do  not. 

Q.  There  are  a  portion  of  the  places  which  are  apparently  closed.  I  would 
inquire  whether  there  are  other  portions  of  the  State  in  which  it  continues  ? 

A.  There  are  some- towns  in  the  State  where  the  public  sale  is  continued, 
the  number  yet  being  large  enough.  There  have  always,  I  think,  been  some 
places. 


734  APPENDIX. 

Q.  NOAV,  in  regard  to  the  private  or  secret  sale,  have  you  any  means  of 
judging  how  far  that  is  carried  on,  or  whether  it  is  discontinued  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  that  there  has  always  been,  since  the  law  was  enforced, 
a  secret  sale  of  liquors  to  a  certain  extent.  The  very  fact  that  it  is  secret, 
of  course,  would  prevent  any  one  who  is  not  himself  a  purchaser,  from 
forming  an  opinion  as  to  the  extent  of  it 

Q.  Really,  then,  one  cannot  tell  what  the  amount  of  that  sale  is,  very 
well? 

A.  During  the  ten  years  of  my  official  life  my  duties  have  led  me  into  all 
parts  of  the  State,  generally  stopping  at  hotels,  and  stopping  at  hotels  where, 
if  sold  at  all,  of  course  it  was  sold  secretly,  and  all  persons  could  form  some 
opinion,  quite  indefinite,  but  yet  some  opinion  as  to  the  sale  of  it. 

Q.  In  large  places  was  it  or  not  a  question  that  there  were  secret  places  in 
all  the  hotels  where  it  could  be  got  ? 

A .  It  has.  always  been  understood  that  there  were  places  where  it  could 
be  purchased  ;  and  it  has  not  been  an  uncommon  thing  for  the  police  in  our 
cities  to  ferret  out  such  places,  and  have  those  who  had  charge  of  them  pros- 
ecuted and  convicted. 

Q.  Is  there  any  difficulty  in  anybody  in  the  State  of  Maine  at  the  present 
time,  who  desires,  getting  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  There  is  a  very  large  number  of  towns  in  the  State  where  it  would  be 
impossible  to  get  it — a  very  large  number,  and  some  of  them  large  towns.  In 
our  cities  and  in  a  large  number  of  the  large  towns,  I  have  no  doubt  that 
there  arc  places  where  persons  can  succeed  in  getting  liquors. 

Q.  Can  they  not  get  them  now  as  well  as  ever  ?  Is  there  any  difficulty 
in  their  obtaining  them,  if  they  wish  to  get  them  ? 

A.  I  can  hardly  state  anything  in  addition  to  what  I  have  stated,  that  I 
have  no  doubt  that  in  places  like  Portland,  Bangor  and  other  places,  persons 
who  want  liquors  can  obtain  them. 

Q.  Is  there  any  difficulty  in  a  gentleman  going  from  Massachusetts  to  any 
of  the  hotels  in  Portland,  and  getting  liquor  if  he  wants  it  ? 

A.  That  is  a  question  that  I  am  not  able  to  answer.  I  have  no  means  of 
knowing  about  it.  Perhaps  I  ought  to  say  this ;  if  not  directly  in  answer  to 
that,  that  my  opinion  is  that  a  gentleman  putting  up  at  most  of  our  hotels 
who  ordered  a  bottle  of  wine  sent  to  his  room,  could  have  it  done,  while  it 
would  be  perhaps  impossible  to  get  it  in  any  other  way. 

Q.  From  your  observation  in  your  course  as  a  public  man,  (and  I  have 
known  it  for  a  long  time  to  be  a  consistent  one),  I  would  like  your  opinion 
whether  under  the  operation  of  your  legislation  any  persons  in  the  habit  of 
drunkenness  or  persons  in  the  habit  of  drinking,  though  not  as  a  beverage, 
have,  from  the  mere  operation  of  your  legislation,  been  reclaimed,  or  whether 
moderate  drinkers  have  been  induced  to  give  it  up  altogether  ? 

A.    If  you  ask  my  opinion  upon  that  matter  I  can  give  it. 

Q.     Yes,  sir,  you  can  do  no  more  than  to  give  your  opinion. 

A.  My  opinion  has  been  from  the  first  and  has  been  continually  strength- 
ened by  my  observation  and  personal  connection  with  the  enforcement  of  the 
law,  that  one  of  the  most  valuable  results  of  it  is,  it  has  an  effect  on  the 
public  sentiment  in  making  it  disreputable  to  drink,  and  in  restraining  men 


APPENDIX.  735 

from  a  practice  in  which  they  could  not  indulge  except  by  doing  it  secretly, 
which  they  do  not  like  to  do  ;  and,  therefore,  aside  from  its  direct  influence 
perhaps  its  most  valuable  work  was  on  the  point  you  suggested,  making  the 
use  of  liquor  disreputable  and  thereby  restraining  the  young  from  the  habit. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  has  had  any  effect  upon  the  personal  habits  of  the 
people  in  regard  to  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.  I  think  the  law  alone  with  us  has  had  the  effect  to  make  the  use  of 
liquors  in  a  certain  sense  so  unpopular,  that  whereas  it  was  once  common  to 
have  wines  at  social  gatherings  and  parties,  creating  a  temptation  to  the 
young,  and  others,  now  it  is  a  thing  almost  unknown. 

Q.     Since  1851  when  the  law  was  passed,  is  there  less  ? 

A.     I  think  there  is  very  much  less. 

Q.  And  yet  there  is  not  a  hotel  in  Maine,  where  if  a  person  goes  and 
orders  a  bottle  of  wine,  he  could  not  get  it  ? 

A.     There  are  a  large  number  of  hotels  in  Maine. 

Q.     Well,  in  Portland,  the  leading  hotels  ? 

A.  One  of  our  hotels,  within  a  week,  has  come  out  with  an  advertisement 
that  there  will  hereafter  be  no  sale  of  liquors.  It  may  be  because  they  have 
been  prosecuted  several  times  through  the  Winter ;  but  they  now  advertise  as 
a  strictly  temperance  hotel. 

Q.  Would  you  think  that  a  system  of  legislation  that  should  close  up  the 
public  bars,  and  yet  permit  hotels  to  furnish  it  to  their  guests,  would  be  objec- 
tionable ? 

A .  My  opinion  would  be  that  it  would  be  conceding  the  whole  ground 
upon  which  temperance  stands. 

Q.  It  might  be  conceding  the  theory;  but  how  would  it  be  as  to  putting 
the  matter  into  effect  ? 

A.  I  do  not  speak  of  it  simply  as  theory,  because  theory,  disconnected 
from  practical  working,  is  not  of  much  value.  The  mere  fact  that  guests,  in 
violation  of  the  law,  can  have  a  bottle  of  wine  sent  to  them  at  their  rooms  if 
they  want,  perhaps  would  have  no  serious  influence  upon  the  community  in  a 
temperance  point  of  view.  But  the  fact  that  the  law  allowed  that  to  be  done 
•would  take  the  basis  out  of  all  other  temperance  working,  in  my  judgment. 

Q.     Then  you  will  not  concede  the  privilege  to  an  individual  ? 

A.  I  should  regret  very  much  if  any  one  had  not  the  privilege  of  deciding 
that  for  himself. 

Q.    Well,  does  not  this  law  deprive  him  of  that  ? 

A.  I  am  aware  of  no  provision  of  the  law  against  a  person's  having  a  bot- 
tle of  wine  for  his  dinner,  if  he  can  get  it. 

Q.     You  think  it  is  a  thing  that  he  has  a  right  to  decide  upon  ? 

A.  I  think  that  if  he  owns  the  bottle  of  wine,  the  question  whether  he 
shall  use  it  or  not,  is  a  question  entirely  for  his  own  decision. 

Q.     Is  it  right  to  use  it  ? 

A .     I  suppose  you  use  the  word  right  in  two  different  senses. 

Q.  I  mean  the  simple  right.  Is  there  anything  wrong  in  using  it  for  his 
dinner,  calling  for  the  interposition  of  a  system  of  legislation.  Is  there  such 
a  wrong  in  a  man's  using  at  dinner  a  glass  of  wine,  as  to  call  for  an  Act  of 
legislation  to  prevent  it  ? 


736  APPENDIX. 

A.  If  you  speak  of  the  simple  guilt  of  the  act,  in  my  judgment  it  would 
be  wrong  for  a  man  to  use  liquors  in  that  way  on  account  of  the  influence  of 
example,  which  would  lead  others,  he  knows  not  how  many  others,  to  do  the 
same  thing,  and  enter  upon  a  course  of  indulgence,  which,  while  he  might 
save  himself,  they  might  be  led  on  to  their  ruin. 

Q.     Do  you  consider  it  a  moral  sin  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is  a  sin  for  a  man  to  set  an  example  for  the  community, 
which  will  result  in  great  public  injury. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  there  is  any  difficulty  in  the  enforcement  of  a  law  that 
is  based  upon  a  principle  which  a  large  portion  of  the  community  do  not  sub- 
scribe to  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt,  from  my  observation,  that  a  law  which  meets  with 
universal  assent,  as  most  of  our  criminal  laws  do,  can  be  enforced  more  easily 
than  any  law  which  does  not  meet  with  such  assent.  The  general  principle,  I 
have  no  doubt,  is  true,  that  the  more  universally  a  law  agrees  with  the  public 
sentiment,  the  more  easily  it  is  enforced. 

Q.  Will  there  not  always,  in  your  opinion,  be  great  difficulty  in  enforcing 
laws  that  arc  contrary  to  the  public  judgment  V  I  am  not  saying  of  the 
majority,  but  of  a  very  large  minority  of  the  people? 

A.  The  question  seems  to  me  to  involve  the  same  principle  as  before.  In 
proportion  to  the  number  of  those  who  disagree  to  the  principle  of  the  law,  in 
that  proportion  there  will  be  difficulty  in  enforcing  it ;  but  if  the  law  itself  is 
based  on  an  intrinsically  right  principle,  the  very  enforcement  of  it  tends  to 
bring  the  public  sentiment  up  to  the  sentiment  of  the  law,  and  make  it  more 
and  more  easy  to  carry  it  out. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  any  law,  by  the  mere  majority  of  the  legal  voters 
approving  of  the  principle  upon  which  it  is  based,  while  a  large  minority  dis- 
approve of  it,  can  be  enforced  to  any  particular  benefit  ? 

A.  I  take  it  to  be  well  known,  that  there  are  certain  laws  which  come  into 
.existence  by  the  agitation  which  precedes  a  popular  verdict  in  their  favor ; 
and  there  is  a  time  when  the  majority  is  opposed  to  it.  And  it  is  agitated 
until  the  principle  gets  up  to  secure  a  majority,  and  it  then  assumes  a  form 
of  law.  If  a  majority  is  small,  it  is  difficult  at  first  to  execute  it ;  and 
the  difficulty  is  in  proportion  to  the  number  who  are  opposed  to  it ;  and  the 
difficulty  in  the  execution  of  any  law,  in  my  judgment,  lies  in  the  fact  that, 
if  it  is  right,  and  commends  itself  to  the  people,  it  will  not  only  work  itself  up 
to  secure  a  majority,  but  it  will,  in  time,  work  itself  up  to  have  a  preponder- 
ating influence  in  the  community. 

Q.  And  the  question  lies  in  the  idea  whether  the  law  is  a  proper  law  or 
not,  does  it  not  ? 

A.  Whether  the  object  to  be  secured  is  a  good  one  or  a  bad  one,  is  the 
phraseology  I  used. 

Q.     The  end  does  not  always  justify  the  means,  does  it  ? 

A.  The  end,  and  the  principle  underlying  it,  however,  are  the  same  if 
they  are  good. 

Q.  But  if  the  principle  underlying  it  is  a  wrong  one,  would  you  as  judge 
or  as  legislator  advise  the  passage  of  a  law  the  principle  of  which  could  not  be 
executed,  though  the  end  aimed  at  might  be  a  good  one  ? 


APPENDIX.  737 

A.  It  is  rather  hazardous  to  give  opinion  on  specific  questions  of  that 
kind. 

Q.  If  you  were  convinced  that  the  underlying  principles  of  such  a  law 
were  unsound  and  wrong,  would  you  feel  at  liberty  to  base  a  criminal  law 
upon  such  principles,  although  the  end  aimed  at  by  the  law  is  good  ? 

A.  I  confess  that  I  do  not  know  what  you  mean  by  "underlying" 
principles. 

Q.  By  that  I  mean  the  principle  upon 'which  the  law  is  based.  This  law 
assumes  that  certain  practices  are  so  wicked,  as  to  require  the  interposition  of 
legislative  power  ? 

A.  To  answer  that  question,  I  should  have  to  say  that  the  law  assumes 
that  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquor  is  productive  of  evil,  and  that  therefore  the 
traffic  ought  to  be  suppressed.  That  I  would  call  an  underlying  principle. 

Q.     Suppose  that  the  law  contains  no  such  a  principle  as  that  ? 

A.  Every  law  proposes  some  object  to  be  attained;  the  object  to  be 
attained  here,  is  the  suppression  of  the  traffic  in  liquor,  then  comes  a  question 
in  regard  to  the  proper  means  by  which  to  attain  that  object.  The  end  and 
the  means,  it  seems  to  me,  embrace  the  whole.  Therefore  I  do  not  quite 
understand  what  you  mean  by  "  underlying  principle." 

Q.  If  every  man  sold  liquor,  you  would  not  think  that  they  ought  to  be 
hung? 

A.  I  have  never  come  to  that  conclusion.  I  would  make  the  law  the 
wisest  and  best  that  could  be  made  to  secure  the  end. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  SAMUEL  T.  SEELYE. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  I  would  like  to  have  your  opinion  as  to  the 
expediency  and  propriety  of  the  present  liquor  law  as  compared  with  the 
license  system  which  will  license  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  for  the 
purpose  of  a  beverage  ? 

A.  My  opinion  is,  sir,  very  clearly  and  decidedly  in  favor  of  the  prohib- 
itory law,  greatly  preferring  it  to  a  license  law,  and  not  only  greatly  preferring 
it,  but  perfectly  abhorring  the  principle  of  license  as  made  the  basis  of  law. 

Q.  The  evils  of  the  traffic  are  so  great  that  you  think  it  would  not  do  to 
give  a  legal  sanction  to  it  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     And  thereby  substantially  assert  that  a  bad  practice  is  a  right  one  ? 

A.  It  is  my  opinion,  and  the  opinion  of  very  many  with  whom  I  am  asso- 
ciated, that  to  license  in  any  degree  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  liquors  would 
be  a  wrong  of  which  this  Commonwealth  ought  not  to  be  guilty.  I  feel  that 
the  principle  upon  which  the  prohibitory  law  is  based  is  a  right  principle.  It 
seeks  the  entire  suppression  of  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks,  and  we  all 
know  the  evils  that  result  from  that  traffic.  The  only  question  I  have  ever 
heard  mooted  with  reference  to  the  law  is,  whether  it  can  be  enforced.  The 
righteousness  of  the  prohibitory  principle  is  acknowledged  even  by  the  advo- 
cates of  a  license  law.  A  license  law  is  entirely  prohibitory  to  all  who  are 
not  licensed.  If  the  principle  of  prohibition  is  not  right  in  legislation  then 
the  license  law  cannot  be  right,  for  the  advocates  of  that  law  hold  on  to  that 
principle  very  strenuously ;  and  their  argument  at  the  present  day  in  favor  of 
93 


738  APPENDIX. 

a  license  law  is,  that  it  is  going  to  be  so  fearfully  stringent  that  it  will  restrain 
and  limit  a  great  deal  of  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks.  Now,  sir,  I  believe 
that  is  all  moonshine.  No  such  results  can  follow.  Here  is  the  reason. 
Behind  this  prohibitory  law,  upholding  it,  sustaining  it  and  enforcing  it,  is  the 
Christian  sentiment  of  this  Commonwealth.  This  law  is  prayed  for  in  most 
of  our  churches,  if  not  in  all.  It  is  prayed  for  in  thousands  of  family  altars  of 
this  Commonwealth.  What  other  law  is  there  upon  our  statute  book  that  is 
so  supported  by  the  religious,  Christian  sentiment  of  the  people  as  this  ?  And 
what  Christian  man  ever  did  or  ever  would  pray  for  the  enforcement  of  a 
license  law  ?  There  would  not  be  a  prayer  behind  it ;  and  I  say  that  if  you 
take  away  this  prop  upon  which  the  prohibitory  law  rests  for  its  support,  and 
this  mighty  power  which  is  behind  it  for  its  enforcement — if  you  give  up  the 
principle  of  prohibition,  you  admit  that  the  traffic  in  intoxicating  drinks 
cannot  be  regulated  and  restricted,  as  well  as  admit  that  it  cannot  be  sup- 
pressed. .  I  am  sure  that  this  law  can  be  enforced.  In  Hampshire  County  it 
is  now  being  enforced.  In  the  town  of  Easthanipton  it  has  been  enforced, 
and  it  will  be  enforced.  There  is  not  a  place  in  that  town  where  a  glass  of 
anything  that  can  intoxicate  can  be  purchased,  neither  ale  nor  cider.  We 
have  shut  up  every  liquor-shop,  and  we  feel,  as  our  district-attorney  said, 
that  since  we  have  the  decisions  of  the  United  States  Court  in  favor  of  this 
law,  the  law  works  like  a  charm.  It  was  not  until  within  a  few  weeks  that 
the  rumsellers  in  Hampshire  County  knew  that  they  were  liable  to  be  sent  to 
jail  at  the  first  trial.  The  temperance  men  did  not  know  it.  They  have  just 
learned  it,  and  we  feel  now  that  the  law  is  what  we  want.  Yesterday,  at  the 
annual  town  meeting  in  Easthampton,  when  the  town  hall  was  filled  with 
voters,  a  resolution  was  offered  remonstrating  against  the  petition  of  the  Hon. 
Alphcus  Hardy  and  others  for  a  license  law,  and  urging  the  Legislature  to  do 
nothing  with  our  prohibitory  law  excepting  to  make  it  more  stringent.  I  had 
the  honor  of  standing  up  before  that  well-filled  hall,  crowded  indeed  it  was, 
and  advocating  those  resolutions,  and  my  soul  was  thrilled  as  I  looked  over 
that  audience  and  saw  what  I  had  not  seen  since  the  war.  There  was  fire  in 
those  men's  eyes.  There  was  a  determination  written  in  their  countenances, 
showing  a  spirit  that  I  had  not  seen  since  the  war  closed.  What  was  the 
result  ?  A  vote  was  taken  by  standing,  and  that  vote  was  unanimously  in 
favor  of  that  resolution. 

I  have  some  knowledge  of  the  opinion  of  ministers  concerning  this  measure. 
In  the  Hampshire  Association  of  Congregational  ministers  there  is  but  one 
man  who  is  not  strongly,  earnestly  and  decidedly  in  favor  of  this  prohibitory 
law,  and  we  all  think  that  he  would  be  a  little  better  if  he  was.  He  is  not 
the  pastor  of  a  church.  Among  the  Methodist  ministers  I  do  not  know  of 
one  who  is  not  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law.  I  never  saw  a  Methodist 
minister  who  was  not  right  upon  this  subject.  They  are  all  in  favor  of  this 
law.  It  is  just  so  with  the  Baptist  ministers,  and  it  is  just  so  with  the  only 
Unitarian  minister  that  we  have  in  the  county  ;  and  I  do  not  know  a  church- 
member  in  that  region  who  is  not  in  favor  of  the  prohibitory  law ;  and  in 
four  towns  in  the  western  part  of  Hampshire  County,  where  I  reside,  no  man 
to-day  can  purchase  a  glass  of  intoxicating  liquor.  They  are  enforcing  the 
law  all  over  the  county.  Give  us  a  thorough,  efficient  State  Constabulary, 


APPENDIX.  739 

and  we  feel  that  this  law  can  be  executed  all  over  the  Commonwealth.  That 
is  the  sentiment  of  the  people  where  I  live.  We  all  feel — a  great  majority  I 
know,  feel  as  I  do.  That  is  .a  peculiar  county.  My  friend,  the  Hon.  E.  H. 
Sawyer,  who  was  elected  to  the  Senate  this  year,  and  to  the  House  last  year, 
was  elected  to  the  House  last  year  by  a  unanimous  vote.  We  cannot  expect 
such  results  everywhere,  we  cannot  expect  that  there  will  be  such  a  unani- 
mous sentiment  in  favor  of  a  law  all  over  the  Commonwealth,  but  we  feel  as 
we  did  during  the  war,  the  same  chords  are  touched  now  when  this  question 
comes  up  that  Governor  Andrew  touched  by  his  proclamations  during  the 
war.  Massachusetts  can  do  what  is  right,  cost  what  it  may.  She  can  enforce 
this  law  and  do  her  duty  here  as  she  did  it  then.  When  gentlemen  say  that 
the  law  cannot  be  enforced,  we  reply  that  we  want  to  try  it.  We  want  to  put 
the  matter  to  the  test.  We  all  feel  just  as  Senator  Stockbridge  said  to  me 
last  year  when  I  asked  him  if  there  was  any  danger  of  the  license  law  being 
passed  at  the  last  session.  He  said,  "Massachusetts  never  takes  a  back- 
track ;"  and  we  feel  that  it  would  be  taking  a  back-track  if  we  had  a  license 
law.  We  feel  that  a  permission  given  to  one  man  to  sell,  breaks  down  all  the 
force  of  the  law.  If  right  men  have  that  privilege  it  is  right  for  all  men  to 
have  it. 

There  are  some  facts  respecting  the  enforcement  of  the  law  in  Connecticut 
that  I  would  like  to  give,  but  not  to  take  up  the  time  of  this  Committee.  I 
will  only  add  one  thing.  In  Easthampton,  we  have  the  celebrated  Williston 
Seminary,  where  nearly  two  hundred  young  men  are  gathered  all  the  while 
for  education.  Many  gentlemen  come  to  me  and  ask  about  the  influence 
that  will  be  exerted  in  that  institution  upon  their  children.  Again  and  again 
the  question  has  been  asked,  "  Is  there  any  place  in  your  town  where  intoxi- 
cating liquors  can  be  purchased  ?  "  And  one  gentlemen  with  whom  I  talked 
who  was  in  favor  of  the  license  law  said  in  answer  to  this  question,  "  Is  there 
a  gentleman  in  the  United  States  who  has  a  son  to  be  educated,  who  would 
not  rather  put  him  in  the  seminary  in  Easthampton,  where  the  prohibitory 
law  was  enforced  than  put  him  in  a  town  where  the  license  law  permitted 
any  man  in  the  town  under  any  circumstances  to  sell  liquors  ?  "  He  answered 
what  you  may  imagine, — "  Certainly,  any  gentleman  would  prefer  to  send 
Lis  son  where  he  could  not  be  able  to  get  a  drink  of  liquor  under  any  circum- 
stances." We  all  feel  that  we  must  care  for  our  young  men  ;  that  we  must 
not  permit  the  sale  of  liquor  in  a  single  place  where  our  young  men  or  any- 
body else  can  purchase  that  which  will  intoxicate. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Did  you  make  the  same  speech  yesterday  that  you 
just  made  here  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  never  repeat  the  same  speech.  This  is  such  a  grand  subject 
that  I  can  make  a  thousand  different  speeches  on  it  the  same  day. 

Q.    I  supposed  you  came  as  a  witness  to  state  the  facts  ? 

A.    That  was  what  I  designed  to  do,  and  I  intend  to  do  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  At  this  meeting  at  Easthampton,  not  only  the 
religious  people  of  this  town,  but  the  people  generally  were  present,  were  they 
not? 

A.    Certainly.  '   . 


740  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Those  who  did  not  profess  to  be  religious,  and  those  who  feel  an  inter- 
est in  the  welfare  of  the  Commonwealth  were  present  and  voted  unani- 
mously on  the  resolutions  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir.    Not  a  man  stood  up  against  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  I  desire  to  ask  you  whether  you  are  entirely  confi- 
dent that  there  will  ever  be  such  an  enforcement  of  this  prohibitory  law  as 
will  prevent  drunkenness  and  intemperance  in  the  Commonwealth  ? 

A.    I  am. 

Q.    You  entertain  no  doubt  about  that  ? 

A.    None  at  all,  sir. 

Q.  And  are  you  also  of  the  opinion  that  it  will  be  so  enforced  as  to 
entirely  exclude  the  use  of  intoxicating  liquor  as  a  beverage  from  all  classes  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  have  no  doubt  about  that  ? 

A.  None  at  all,  sir. 

Q.     Not  the  least? 

A.    Not  the  least,  sir. 

Q.    How  long,  in  your  opinion,  will  it  be  before  that  time  will  come  ? 

A.  It  will  be  necessary  for  a  great  many  of  the  present  generation,  who 
are  pressing  the  license  law,  to  pass  away,  before  that  point  is  reached,  but  I 
believe  it  will  be  reached  by  and  by. 

Q.  You  believe  that  your  opinion  upon  this  subject  is  entirely  right,  do 
you? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.  And  you  believe  that  the  opinions  of  other  gentlemen  who  differ  with 
you  are  entirely  wrong  ? 

A.  I  do,  sir.  I  do  not  say,  however,  that  there  are  not  good  men  like  my 
worthy  friend,  Mr.  Child,  who  are  in  favor  of  a  license  law.  By  no  means. 
I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  every  man  is  a  bad  man  who  is  in  favor  of  it,  but  I 
do  say  that  I  think  that  every  man  who  is  in  favor  of  it  is  wrong,  just  exactly 
as  I  thought  years  ago  in  reference  to  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law,  and  the  old 
question  of  slavery.  There  were  ministers,  pious,  godly  men,  who  believed  in 
the  Fugitive  Slave  Law  and  in  slavery.  I  then  felt  that  they  were  wrong, 
and  I  feel  so  now  ;  and  I  feel  that  they  would  have  been  better  men  if  they 
had  believed  differently  on  the  subject. 

Q.  Do  you  concede  an  honest  difference  of  opinion  to  those  who  differ 
with  you  in  this  matter  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.  There  may  be,  then>  men  who  believe  that  as  a  matter  of  legislation, 
some  law  different  from  the  present  law  would  be  better,  and  still  be  honest  in 
that  belief? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.  What  do  you  then  think,  sir,  of  an  effort  by  yourself,  and  by  men  who 
believe  as  you  do,  to  put  your  opinion  in  the  form  of  a  criminal  law  against 
what  you  concede  to  be  an  honest  opinion  of  other  persons  of  the  community  ? 

A.  I  think  about  this  matter  just  as  I  did  about  the  old  slave  laws — that 
the  fact  that  men  honestly  believed  that  slavery  was  the  best  condition  for  a 


APPENDIX.  741 

certain  portion  of  the  race,  would  not  hinder  me  an  instant  from  passing  a  law 
that  would  permit  every  slave  to  go  free. 

Q.    If  you  felt  that  one  mode  of  legislation  would  practically  and  actually 
promote  the  cause  of  temperance,  and  prevent  intemperance  better  than 
another  mode,  would  you  not  take  that  kind  of  a  law  ? 
A.     That  is  the  kind  of  law  I  do  take. 

Q.  That  is  begging  the  question.  The  question  is,  would  you  not  prefer 
that  kind  of  legislation  which  would  most  effectually  suppress  the  evils  of 
intemperance  ? 

A.  Certainly  I  would.  That  is  the  great  thing  to  be  aimed  at;  but  I 
would  have  the  Commonwealth  in,  and,  by  the  means  which  she  takes  to 
secure  that  end,  act  worthy  of  herself. 

Q.  What  other  way  is  there  for  the  Commonwealth  to  act  worthy  of  herself 
than  to  take  the  best  means  of  doing  the  best  act  ? 

A.  That  comprehends  all.  If  you  take  the  best  means  of  doing  the  best 
act,  that  is  all  that  we  ask. 

Q.    Now,  you  and  I  may  differ  as  to  what  are  the  best  means,  and  we  may 
honestly  differ,  may  we  not  ? 
A.     Certainly. 

Q.  Does  it  not  then  result,  after  all,  that  this  is  but  a  question  of  opinion 
between  men  ?  Your  opinion  may  be  a  great  deal  better  than  mine,  and  I 
presume  that  it  is  ;  but  do  you  not  think  that  you  deny  an  honest  difference 
of  opinion  when  you  say  that  all  this  talk  of  a  license  law  is  "  moonshine  ?  " 

A.  I  say  that  all  this  talk  of  a  license  law  promoting  the  cause  of  temper- 
ance is  "moonshine."  I  did  not  know  that  my  respected  friend,  Mr.  Child, 
stood  upon  that  platform,  or  I  would  have  been  more  careful. 

Q.  I  ask,  after  all,  if  one  man  honestly  believes  that  one  kind  of  legislation 
will  best  promote  the  object  aimed  at,  and  another  another,  is  it  not  between 
them  a  mere  matter  of  opinion  as  to  what  may  be  the  best  means  to  accom- 
plish the  same  ends  ?  They  differ  in  opinion  as  to  the  means,  but  is  there 
anything  more  in  it  than  a  difference  of  opinion  ? 

A.     There  may  be,  sir.    I  feel  in  this  case  that  there  is  a  difference  of  ' 
opinion  between  you  and  me.    In  my  case,  in  addition  to  my  opinion,  is  my 
conscience ;  but  in  this  case  I  do  not  understand  you  to  urge  that  you  are 
acting  with  any  regard  to  your  conscience,  any  more  than  you  would  in  any 
other  matter  of  legislation. 

Q.  Did  you  hear  what  I  said  in  the  opening  of  the  case  before  this  Com- 
mittee ? 

A.     No,  sir;  I  only  came  into  the  city  this  morning. 

Q.  Do  you  mean,  then,  in  regard  to  what  we  have  said  and  done  upon 
this  subject,  and  what  has  been  said  and  done  by  the  large  number  of  gentle- 
men who  have  signed  this  petition,  to  asperse  them  all  as  not  acting  in  accord- 
ance with  their  conscience  ? 

A.     Of  course  not ;  I  meant  no  aspersion. 

Q.  Do  you  not  mean  to  say  that  you  act  from  conscience  and  they  do 
not? 

A.  Certainly  I  do,  but  not  in  the  sense  in  which  you  take  it.  I  feel  that 
in  sustaining  this  prohibitory  law  we  are  acting  from  the  promptings  of  our 


742  APPENDIX. 

conscience.  It  is  a  part  of  our  religion.  Our  Christianity  has  to  do  with  it 
As  Christian  men,  as  good  men,  we  stand  up  for  this  law  and  for  its  enforce- 
ment. Now,  here  are  certain  laws  which  are  before  the  Legislature,  in  which 
men  who  advocate  them  do  not  feel  impelled  to  sustain  them  by  their  con- 
science or  by  their  religion.  It  is  not  saying  anything  against  a  man  to  say 
that  he  is  in  favor  of  such  a  law,  just  simply  from  his  intellectual  conviction, 
and  that  his  conscience  has  nothing  to  do  with  it,  and  where  there  is  no  great 
principle  of  right  underlying  the  law  ;  and  that  is  the  attitude  in  which  my 
respected  friend,  Mr.  Child,  is  placed.  I  do  not  think  that  he  is  acting  con- 
trary to  his  conscience  ;  but  I  think  that  his  conscience  has  nothing  particu- 
larly to  do  with  his  action.  There  is  no  aspersion  or  slur  in  that,  I  think. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  those  who  are  in  favor  of  a  license  law,  the 
large  number  of  Christian  ministers  standing  as  well  in  the  community  as 
other  Christian  ministers,  who  have  come  here  and  testified  in  favor  of  a 
license  law — do  you  mean  to  say  that  they  are  not  honest,  by  every  Christian 
principle,  in  what  they  have  said  and  done  ? 

A.  I  mean  to  say  that  they  are  not  prompted  by  conscience  to  advocate 
the  license  law  ;  that  it  does  not  take  hold  of  them  so  that  they  can  pray  for 
it  and  work  for  it  as  Christian  men,  from  the  impulse  of  their  conscience  and 
religious  nature. 

Q.     Is  it  right  for  you  to  say  that  ? 

A.     It  is  my  opinion  and  I  have  a  right  to  express  it. 

Q.  I  ask  you,  as  a  Christian  minister,  is  it  right  for  you  to  say  that  these 
other  Christian  ministers  have  acted  upon  a  matter  that  they  could  not  pray  for. 

A.    I  have  not  said  that  they  could  not. 

Q.  Well,  upon  a  matter  that  they  do  not  pray  for.  What  reason  have  you 
to  say  that  ? 

A.  I  will  give  you  a  reason.  I  never  heard  a  man  pray  for  a  license  law. 
I  cannot  imagine  how  he  would  go  to  work  to  do  it.  Now,  I  have  heard  a 
great  many  prayers  for  the  enforcement  of  the  prohibitory  law.  I  object  to 
my  statements  being  twisted  so  as  to  intimate  any  kind  of  reproach  or  slur 
upon  other  Christian  ministers.  I  would  not  say  that  those  distinguished 
ministers  and  Christian  men  who  stood  up  here  and  testified  in  favor  of  a 
license  law  were  acting  against  their  consciences.  I  do  not  say  any  such 
thing,  not  at  all.  If  what  I  have  said  is  understood  as  I  meant  it,  it  does  not 
cast  upon  them  the  slightest  slur  or  reproach. 

Q.  But  what  you  say  does  recommend  your  own  opinion  as  a  conscientious 
one,  while  theirs  is  not  ? 

A.  There  is  a  greater  power  behind  a  prohibitory  law  than  there  can  be 
behind  a  license  law ;  that  is  my  opinion. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  have  not  meant  to  cast  any  reproach  upon  those  who 
have  expressed  a  different  opinion  ? 

A.     Certainly  not. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  a  man's  Christian  principle  will  not  induce  him  to 
promote  temperance  by  means  of  a  license  law  ? 

A.     You  seem  desirous  to  push  me  a  little  further  than  I  meant  to  go. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  you  do  not  think  the  advocates  of  a  license 
law  pray  for  the  cause  of  temperance  ? 


APPENDIX.  743 

A.    I  am  rather  afraid  they  do  not ;  that  sonic  of  them  do  I  have  no  doubt. 

Q.  Is  there  not  on  this  question  an  opportunity,  of  a  fair  difference  of 
opinion  between  conscientious  and  praying  men  ? 

A.  There  may  be  an  honest  difference  o£  opinion  between  those  who  sus- 
tain, the  one  the  prohibitory  and  the  other  the  license  law. 

Q.  I  speak  of  the  class  of  men  who  have  appeared  here,  both  to  advocate 
and  to  testify  in  favor  of  a  license  law ;  is  there  not,  in  your  opinion,  between 
them  and  you,  an  opportunity  for  an  honest  difference  of  opinion,  and  may 
they  not  be  as  conscientiously  engaged  in  promoting,  in  their  way,  the  temper- 
ance reform,  as  you  in  promoting  it  in  your  way  ? 

A.     I  said  that  I  believed  that  many  of  them  were  as  honest  as  I  am. 

Q.  May  they  not  be  impelled  by  their  conscience  in  lively  operation,  to 
take  the  same  course  they  have  ? 

A.    It  is  possible. 

Q.  You  think  it  is  barely  possible,  apd  that  is  all  the  measure  of  charity 
that  you  give  to  Christian  brethren  ? 

A.    Did  I  use  the  word  "  barely  "  ? 

Q.  Are  you  willing  to  answer  the  question,  whether  you  think  that  they 
are  or  are  not  conscientiously  impelled  to  take  the  course  they  do  ? 

A .  I  must  say  that  it  is  rather  a  difficult  question  to  answer,  and  I  doubt 
whether  I  ought  to  be  pressed  to  give  an  opinion.  There  are  some  whom  I 
believe  are  as  conscientious  as  myself  who  favor  a  different  policy  ;  but  when 
I  see  that  every  man  in  the  community,  who  wants  to  open  a  dram-shop,  and 
every  vile  character,  so  far  as  I  know,  is  in  favor  of  a  license  law,  it  makes 
me  a  littje  suspicious  about  some  of  them. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  those  gentlemen  and  Governor  Andrew  and 
myself  are  here  advocating  that  which  shall  open  dram-shops  ? 

A.     Of  course ;  I  suppose  that  will  be  the  result. 

Q.  And  to  play  into  the  vile  hands  of  the  vile  characters  of  the  com- 
munity ? 

A.  I  do  not  say  that  that  is  your  intention,  but  such,  will  be  the  result 
of  the  license  law  and  the  free  sale  of  liquor. 

Q.     Do  you  understand  that  anybody  here  advocates  the  free  sale  of  " 
liquor  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  no  man  would  dare  to  do  it.  You  could  not  hope  to  get  a 
license  law  upon  that  ground.  You  must  promise  to  have  the  law  immensely 
stringent. 

Q.    Do  you  mean  to  say,  then,  that  we  are  playing  a  false  game  here  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  not  that  all  of  you  are,  but  that  some  men  are,  who  pay  the 
money  and  hire  the  counsel  that  they  may  sell  liquor.  That  some  of  them 
are  actuated  by  that  motive,  I  have  no  doubt.  The  liquor-dealers  want  to 
sell  liquor  without  the  fear  of  the  jail  before  them,  and  would  have  their  busi- 
ness licensed  by  the  government  that  it  may  be  made  more  respectable.  I 
have  heard  that  statement  made  again  and  again. 

Q.  You  spoke,  sir,  of  opening  dram-shops.  Do  you  understand  that  to  be 
the  object  of  the  gentlemen  who  have  testified  here  ?  J  ^  I  »  i  \  A  j  t 

.4.     Oh  no,  sir ;  I  presume  not  the  majority  of  them. 

I    \  J  VKKSIT 

I    < 'A  UFO  K 


744  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  it  to  be  the  object  of  those  upon  whose  petition  this 
investigation  is  taking  place  ? 

A.     I  do  not  think  it  is  Mr.  Hardy's  object. 

Q.     Do  you  think  it  is  the  object  of  any  of  the  petitioners  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  who  the  other  petitioners  are. 

Q.  Then  you  should  be  careful  about  expressing  an  opinion  about  their 
motives. 

A  •  Of  course ;  and  I  have  been  extremely  careful  to  express  my  opinion 
just  exactly  as  I  had  it,  and  without  injury  or  unfairness  toward  any  man.  I 
have  not  said  all  I  felt  toward  them,  but  have  restrained  myself. 

Q.  Is  there,  at  the  present  time,  or  would  there  be  in  the  town  of  East- 
hampton,  if  the  question  was  left  to  the  people  whether  or  not  the  prohibitory 
law  should  be  enforced,  or  a  modification  of  that  law  enforced,  any  doubt  as 
to  the  decision  of  the  people  ? 

A.     Not  at  all. 

Q.  If,  then,  a  law  should  be  passed,  submitting  to  the  people  of  Hamp- 
shire County,  the  decision  of  that  question,  what,  in  your  opinion,  would  be 
the  decision  of  the  people  ? 

A.     There  would  be  an  overwhelming  majority  in  favor  of  prohibition. 

Q.  Suppose  the  law  permitted  the  people  of  each  county  to  decide  for 
themselves  the  question  whether  or  not  the  sale  of  liquors  should  be  permitted 
in  that  county,  and  the  people  of  Hampshire  County  decided  in  favor  of  pro- 
hibition, would  there  be  any  difficulty  in  enforcing  the  law  there  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  think  there  would  be  difficulty,  if  there  was  a  permission 
given  for  the  sale  of  liquor  in  Boston.  We  feel  now  that  in  this  law^  we  have 
the  Commonwealth  behind  us  ;  in  the  other  case  we  should  only  have  Hamp- 
shire County. 

Q.    You  have  the  truth  upon  your  side,  have  you  not  ? 

A.     To  be  sure. 

Q.  Are  you  not  strong  enough  for  that,  or  do  you  feel  that  you  want 
Boston  to  come  to  your  help  ? 

A.  Of  course  we  want  Boston  to  come  to  our  views  ;  we  want  the  centre 
right. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  Hampshire  County  can  take  care  of  itself,  even 
if  Boston  does  not  think  as  you  do  ? 

A.     I  think  it  is  better  to  have  Boston  think  as  we  do. 

Q.     But  suppose  that  Boston  thinks  right  the  other  way  ? 

A.  Then  we  will  use  arguments,  entreaties  and  persuasions,  and  all  other 
proper  influences  to  get  Boston  right. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  would  be  right  for  the  people  of  Boston,  if  they  enter- 
tained an  opinion  that  it  was  better  to  have  a  modification  of  the  present 
law,  to  force  that  modification  upon  the  people  of  Hampshire  County  against 
their  wish  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir  ;  politically  right,  but  not  morally  right. 

Q.  Would  it  be  politically  right  for  the  people  of  Hampshire  County  to 
force  upon  Boston  a  system  of  legislation  against  her  wish  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     And  against  the  conscientious  opinion  of  her  best  citizens  ? 


APPENDIX.  745 

A.  Certainly.  I  think  it  would  be  just  as  right  for  Hampshire  as  for  Bos- 
ton. I  said  it  would  be  right  for  Boston  to  govern  Hampshire  if  she  had  a 
majority  ;  so  I  say  it  would  be  right  for  Hampshire  to  govern  Boston  if  she 
had  the  majority. 

Q.     Would  such  action  be  morally  right  in  respect  to  a  question  of  police  ? 

A.  I  do  not  understand  just  that  limit.  I  am  not  lawyer  enough  to  under- 
stand it ;  but  we  are  all  together  in  the  Commonwealth  and  the  majority  is  to 
rule.  I  think  that  principle  is  right. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  alcohol  is  an  article  of  commerce  in  the  com- 
munity and  as  such  is  to  be  bought  and  sold  ?  Is  not  the  regulation  of  that 
sale  a  question  to  be  determined  by  each  community  for  its  own  interest  ? 

A.     Not  for  each  municipality  but  for  the  whole  Commonwealth. 

Q.     Why  do  you  say  the  whole  Commonwealth  and  not  the  whole  country  ? 

A.  I  should  like  it  better  for  the  whole  country  to  act  upon  this  matter. 
Your  question  implies  that  alcohol  is  an  article  of  commerce  and  as  such  will 
continue  to  be  sold.  I  do  not  admit  that  statement  as  the  truth. 

Q.    I  mean  under  the  present  law  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  not  under  the  present  law.  We  are  going  to  suppress  the 
traffic. 

Q.  Under  the  present  prohibitory  law  more  than  half  of  the  liquor  manu- 
factured in  Massachusetts  or  brought  into  it  is  already  sold  ? 

A.     Certainly,  this  law  has  not  been  enforced. 

Q,  It  has  been  sold  for  beverages  and  for  mechanical  and  medicinal 
purposes  ? 

A.     It  will  always  be  sold  for  the  arts,  of  course. 

Q.  Taking  the  fact,  that  one-half  of  all  the  liquor  manufactured  or  brought 
into  the  Commonwealth  has  already  been  sold  for  the  various  purposes  to 
which  it  is  applied,  is  it  not,  when  you  look  at  it  seriously,  a  question  of  wise 
police  regulation  how  this  use  of  this  liquor  shall  be  restrained  so  as  to  produce 
no  bad  results,  and  how  the  distribution  of  it  shall  be  restrained  ?  Here  is  an 
article  of  commerce,  made  so  by  the  constitution  and  laws  of  the  United 
States,  and  more  generally  used  in  the  arts  than  in  any  other  one  thing ;  now 
how  shall  this  article  be  distributed  so  as  to  produce  the  least  evil  ? 

A.  If  I  understand  your  question  rightly,  it  amounts  to  this  :  how  can  we 
best  remove  the  evils  resulting  from  the  liquor  traffic  ? 

Q.     No,  sir ;  my  question  just  now  involved  that. 

A.     That  is  the  way  I  understood  it. 

Q.  My  question  is,  how  shall  the  evils  resulting  from  the  misuse  of  an 
article,  legally  an  article  of  traffic  and  of  commerce,  best  be  restrained  ? 

A.  That  is  not  a  question  with  me.  The  only  question  with  me  is,  how 
the  traffic  shall  best  be  suppressed — the  traffic  in  intoxicating  drink  as  a 
beverage.  I  do  not  like  the  word  "  restrained  "  in  your  question,  if  you  will 
permit  me  to  dissent. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  you  are  going  in  Massachusetts  to  suppress  the 
use  of  the  ten  million  of  gallons  of  liquor  annually  used  in  the  arts  ? 

A.    No,  sir;  but  I  would  suppress  all  used  as  a  beverage. 

Q.     Will  you  not  also  take  the  best  means  to  restrain  and  prevent  the  mis- 
use of  that  which  is  intended  for  use  in  the  arts  ? 
94 


746  APPENDIX. 

A.     Certainly  I  would. 

Q.  If  you  found  out  that  entire  prohibition  would  not  restrain  the  abuse, 
would  you  not  then  try  something  else  ? 

A.    I  cannot  conceive  of  the  possibility  which  is  suggested  in  the  question. 

Q.     What  do  you  understand  by  the  enforcement  of  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  That  it  will  not  be  sold  openly,  nor  in  any  other  manner,  except  as  the 
law  regulates. 

Q.  If  it  is  sold  as  the  law  permits,  and  the  liquor  is  then  misused,  is  it  any 
the  less  injurious  than  if  sold  in  any  other  way  ? 

A,     Of  course  not. 

Q.  A  large  quantity  of  this  liquid  goes  into  the  mechanics'  shops  ;  suppose 
the  men  get  hold  of  it  and  use  it  as  a  beverage — they  may  use  it  in  that  way, 
may  they  not  ? 

A.     Of  course. 

Q.  Now,  sir,  as  the  sale  must  be  permitted,  may  there  not  be  an  honest  dif- 
ference of  opinion  in  regard  to  the  manner  in  which  it  shall  be  restrained  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  that  there  may  be  an  honest  difference  of  opinion 
there. 

Q.  If  the  prohibitory  law  were  really  enforced,  what  do  you  think  would 
be  the  effect  of  annually  distributing  ten  million  gallons  of  liquor  through  the 
town  agencies  ?  Suppose  the  town  agencies  undertake  to  distribute  this  ten 
million  gallons  for  use  in  the  arts  would  it  not  necessarily  make  every  town 
agency  a  grog-shop  upon  a  grand  scale  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  I  think  not. 

Q.  Would  it  not  necessarily  raise  up  a  great  interest,  a  great  political 
power  connected  with  this  sale,  that  nobody  could  overthrow  ?  Do  you  believe 
that  the  putting  of  this  ten  million  gallons  of  liquor,  equivalent  to  -twenty-five 
million  of  dollars,  into  the  hands  of  the  town  agents  for  distribution  for 
mechanical  and  medicinal  purposes,  could  be  effected  without  producing 
incalculable  mischief? 

A .  Why  not  ?  It  is  always  a  troublesome  thing  to  manage  liquor.  It  is 
hard  to  find  a  man  to  whom  it  can  be  committed  for  distribution,  who  will 
remain  honest  under  the  temptation,  and  this  is  one  of  the  reasons  why  I  am 
so  opposed  to  licensing  anybody  to  sell  it. 

Q.  Would  not  such  an  amount  of  business  necessarily  tend  to  corrupt  the 
agencies,  and  so  act  that  what  had  begun  with  temperance  would  end.  in  grog 
politics  and  a  grog  party  ? 

A.     No,  I  do  not  think  so. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  think  not ;  is  not  that  a  question  upon  which  the 
friends  of  temperance  may  honestly  differ, — whether  they  will  embark  the 
Commonwealth  in  the  interest  of  selling  liquor  to  the  amount  of  twenty-five- 
million  of  dollars  per  year,  or  keep  the  Commonwealth  pure  from  the  traffic 
and  bring  all  moral  efforts  to  bear  upon  the  cause  of  temperance  ?  Is  not 
that  a  moral  question  upon  which  our  temperance  men  may  honestly  differ  ? 

A.  They  may  differ  of  course,  but  I  do  not  see  how  there  can  be  any 
greater  danger  than  at  present. 

Q.    Have  you  ever  thought,  of  this  question  before  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  not  seriously. 


APPENDIX.  747 

Q.    Has  it  ever  occurred  to  you  before  ? 

A.  Not  that  there  was  any  danger  that  could  result  from  the  execution  of 
the  law  greater  than  the  danger  at  present  existing. 

Q.  Then  you  must  admit,  that  men  of  thought'  and  reflection  may  have 
seen  danger  in  that  direction  and  therefore  honestly  differ  with  you  as  to  the 
expediency  of  such  legislation  ? 

A.     To  be  sure  they  may. 

Q.  And  may  not  thinking  and  reflecting  men,  honestly  feel  and  fear  that 
under  such  a  system  the  Commonwealth  may  be  swept  into  a  sea  of  grog 
politics  ? 

A .    Perhaps  so,  but  I  have  not  the  slightest  apprehension  of  such  result. 

Q.     You  may  not  have. 

A.  Nor  do  I  see  how  anybody  else  can  have.  I  am  not  afraid  that  a 
thorough  enforcement  of  the  prohibitory  law  will  swamp  the  State  in  intem- 
perance. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  liquor  ought  to  be  sold  as  a  medicine  ? 

A.    I  have  my  doubts  about  it. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  would  be  wrong,  if  a  man  had  a  broken  limb  to  apply 
a  bandage  wet  with  spirits  and  water  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  that  there  would  be  any  wrong  in  that. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  of  the  fact  that  for  the  last  ten  years  the  spirits  for 
wetting  the  bandage  in  such  a  case  as  I  have  supposed-  could  not  be  bought 
or  sold  in  Boston  without  a  violation  of  the  law  ? 

A.    I  have  seen  that  statement  in  the  papers. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  statement  correct  ? 

A.  I  presume  the  facts  as  stated,  that  it  could  not  be  bought  of  any. 
licensed  dealer  is  correct.  But  I  think  that  matter  could  be  easily  arranged 

Q.  But  that  has  been,  and  is,  the  state  of  things  existing  under  the  pro- 
hibitory law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  The  attempt  has  been  made  to  commit  you  to  the 
idea  that  by  the  enforcement  of  this  law,  we  should  be  swamped  in  a  sea  of 
grog  politics.  Have  we  not  been  swamped  in  that  sea  before  ? 

A.    We  have  been  in  danger  of  it,  it  seems  to  me. 

Adjourned. 


748  APPENDIX. 


TWENTY-FIRST    DAY. 

WEDNESDAY,  March  27, 1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  the  hearing  of  testimony  on 
behalf  of  the  Remonstrants  was  resumed. 

[ 
TESTIMONY  OF  ALBERT  DAY,  M.  D. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  You  are  a  graduate  of  Harvard  Medical  College, 
and  are  Superintendent  of  the  Washingtonian  Home  ? 

A.     I  am,  sir. 

Q.     How  many  years  have  you  occupied  your  present  position  ? 

A.     Almost  ten  years — nine  and  one-half  years,  I  think. 

Q.  I  have  heard  a  rumor  that  you  are  about  to  leave  that  situation.  Have 
you  been  called  to  another  similar  one  ? 

A.  I  have ;  but  I  was  not  aware  that  it  had  become  so  public  as  to  be 
spoken  of  here.  I  have  been  called  to  a  larger  institution. 

Q.     A  similar  institution  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  state  briefly  the  effect  of  alcoholic  beverages  upon  the  human 
economy,  particularly  from  your  own  point  of  view  ? 

Q.  Well,  sir,  I  presume  the  question  is  asked  upon  physiological  grounds, 
as  to  the  effects  of  an  excess  upon  a  healthy  economy,  is  it  not  ? 

Q.     Yes,  sir. 

A.  Well,  sir,  it  is  very  pernicious  in  every  respect.  It  destroys  the  tone 
of  the  stomach ;  it  destroys  the  power  of  digestion,  and  prevents  the  assimila- 
tion of  food ;  it  destroys  the  tone  of  the  nervous  system,  and  develops  the 
lower  emotions ;  it  suppresses  the  higher,  and  it  makes  anything  but  a  inan 
and  a  good  man ;  it  develops  different  forms  of  mania,  and  converts  a  good 
man  into  a  bad  man.  There  arc  many  details  which  might  be  related  which 
do  not  occur  to  me  at  this  moment. 

Q.  What  is  your  observation  in  regard  to  those  whom  you  came  in  contact 
with  in  your  duties,  in  regard  to  the  temptation  to  drink  moderately  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  they  almost  always — and  I  do  not  know  but  I  may  say 
always — commence  as  moderate  drinkers ;  commencing  usually  in  the  moderate 
use,  and  the  habit  gradually  growing  upon  them  until  they  find  themselves 
drunkards,  although  they  generally  are  the  last  ones  to  find  it  out.  All  his 
friends  find  it  out,  and  the  community  in  which  he  lives  find  it  out ;  but  he  is 
the  last  man  to  find  that  such  is  the  fact.  It  is  very  subtle  in  its  operations 
upon  the  human  system.  A  person  will  commence  very  moderately,  and  the 
habit  will  gradually  assume  this  power  over  him  until  it  chains  and  binds  him5 
and  he  finds  himself  the  victim  of  a  power  that  he  cannot  resist. 

Q.  When  awakened  from  the  degradation  to  which  they  have  come,  do 
they  find  themselves  able  to  leave  it  and  be  governed  by  their  better  judg- 
ment? 


APPENDIX.  749 

A.    They  do  not ;  their  judgment  is  destroyed. 

Q.  What  is  your  judgment  as  to  the  integrity  of  men  who  have  fallen  into 
this  habit  ? 

A.  Persons  who  habitually  use  intoxicants,  as  I  have  often  remarked, 
become  affected  as  to  moral  principle,  and  it  will  often  make  them  to  lie  and 
deceive,  and  falsify  every  way. 

Q.     Untruthfulness  is  characteristic  of  them,  is  it  not  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  therefore  this  is  an  illustration  of  your  position,  that  it  develops 
the  lower  instincts  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  it  always  develops  the  lower  instincts  in  our  nature  and 
suppresses  the  higher. 

Q.     Are  these  results  likely  to  become  chronic  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir  ;  the  tendency  of  the  moderate  use  of  alcohol  is  such. 

Q.  Do  you  find  the  universal  appetite  for  strong  drinks  to  be  a  steady  and 
increasing  appetite  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  there  is  always  a  tendency  to  increase  the  appetite,  although 
there  are  exceptions  to  the  rule.  There  is  now  and  then  a  man  in  the  com- 
munity who  can  take  a  glass  of  liquor  occasionally,  and  the  habit  does  not 
grow  upon  him. 

Q.     Are  you  aware  how  generally  it  is  known  among  physicians  ? 

A.  It  is  common  for  physicians  to  disagree ;  and  I  believe  the  most  intelli- 
gent and  the  most  distinguished  in  our  country  are  not  in  favor,  but  deprecate 
the  use  of  alcohol  as  a  medicine  in  that  direction. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Do  you  propose  that  the  Legislature  should  pass 
any  law  to  prevent  these  physicians  from  using  liquor  in  medicine  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  do  not  propose  that  the  Legislature  should  pass  any  law  to 
prevent  physicians  from  using  it. 

Q.  Then  you  do  not  think  that  it  is  desirable  for  the  Legislature  to 
undertake  to  interfere  for  the  purpose  of  controlling  the  subject  of  medication 
in  this  way  ? 

A.    I  think  there  should  be  curbs  thrown  around  all. 

Q.     That  is  not  answering  my  question. 

A.  Well,  of  course,  liquor  should  be  where  it  can  be  obtained  for  medical 
purposes,  because  sometimes  it  is  necessary,  no  doubt. 

Q.  Is  it  not  true  that  a  majority  of  the  medical  profession,  and  the  leading 
men  of  the  medical  profession,  do  very  largely  give  alcoholic  stimulants  to 
their  patients  in  acute  disease,  and  also  in  feebleness  resulting  from  age  or 
other  deteriorating  causes  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  may  say  that  I  believe  that  it  is  not  usually  given,  and  it  is 
well  known  to  the  medical  faculty  that  the  use  of  alcohol  is  a  Boston  notion, 
and  that,  outside  of  Boston,  it  is  not  used  to  any  great  extent. 

Q.  You  mean  to  say  that  in  Connecticut  they  do  not  largely  give  brandy 
and  whiskey  to  people  laboring  under  typhoid  fever,  just  as  commonly  as  they 
give  beef  tea  ? 

A.     No,  sir.     I  mean  to  say  that  they  do  not. 

Q.    Have  you  ever  practised  medicine  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 


750  APPENDIX. 

Q.     Outside  the  Washingtonian  Home  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     You  took  your  degree  sometime  ago  ? 

A.     No, sir;  last  summer. 

Q.    Your  practice  is  here  in  Boston  and  not  in  Connecticut  ? 

A.  I  mean  to  say  that,  from  my  conversation  with  others,  I  learned  the 
fact. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  physicians  do,  as  a  matter  of  personal  practice, 
resort  to  such  beverages  for  their  own  support,  under  excessive  labor  and 
fatigue,  and  when  the  system  becomes  lowered  by  temporary  disease  or  fatigue  ? 

A.    I  am  not  aware  that  such  is  the  fact,  although  it  may  be. 

Q.     Have  you  read  Dr.  Brinton's  work  on  food  and  digestion  ? 

A.    I  have  read  his  work  on  the  stomach. 

Q.     And  have  you  read  his  work  on  food  and  digestion  ? 

A.    I  have  not,  sir. 

Q.  Then  you  are  not  aware  of  the  facts  that  he  expresses  touching  an 
attempt  at  universal  total  abstinence,  as  regards  its  effect  upon  the  health  of 
the  people  ? 

A.  I  have  read  extracts  from  Dr.  Brinton's  work  on  the  stomach,  and  I 
know  what  his  opinions  were  in  regard  to  the  action  of  alcohol  upon  the 
human  economy. 

Q.  The  question  I  am  calling  your  mind  to,  is  the  careful  and  temperate 
use  of  those  beverages,  under  fitting  circumstances,  proportionate  to  the  cir- 
cumstances and  conditions  of  the  individual  person. 

A.     There  is  no  doubt  of  it,  sir,  if  the  temperate  use  is  always  observed. 

Q.  Would  you  make  war  against  the  ocean,  because  some  people  get 
drowned  in  it  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Would  you  make  war  against  the  use  of  alcoholic  beverages  in  gen- 
eral ?  Do  you  make  universal  and  indiscriminate  war  against  all  alcoholic 
drinks  ? 

A.    I  do  ;  because  it  is  a  universal  and  indiscriminate  evil. 

Q.  Then  you  do  make  universal  and  indiscrimate  war  against  these  bever- 
ages, because  of  their  abuse  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  because  of  their  natural  tendency  ;  and  because  the  natural 
and  inevitable  tendency  is  to  excess. 

Q.     The  tendency  is  in  the  man  and  not  in  the  thing,  is  it  not  ? 

A.     If  they  do  not  use  it,  it  will  not  hurt  them. 

Q.     I  understand  you  to  admit  that  there  is  a  proper  use  sometimes  ? 

A .  I  have ;  but  I  think  that  where  one  person  is  saved  by  its  use  as  a 
medicine,  there  are  a  thousand  who  die. 

Q.  Have  you  examined  the  statistics  that  have  been  accumulated  on  this 
subject,  so  as  to  know  that  what  you  have  now  stated,  is  any  more  than  theo- 
retically true  ? 

A.    I  have  read  everything  I  could  find  upon  the  suject. 

Q.  My  question  is  whether  you  have  brought  your  mind  into  connection 
with  the  statistics  accumulated  thus  far  in  this  country  in  reference  to  the 
subject. 


APPENDIX.  751 

A.    I  think  I  have  some. 

Q.     Are  you  aware  what  they  teach  except  upon  the  general  theory  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  believe  that  as  far  as  investigations  have  been  made,  it  is 
freely  conceded  by  scientific  men,  and  by  philanthropists,  that  alcohol  is  the 
great  curse  of  our  race,  destroying  human  life  and  vitality,  and  doing  vastly 
more  injury  than  it  would  if  it  were  not  used. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  the  statistics,  so  far  as  known,  show  no  such 
thing,  and  if  so,  where  is  the  man  that  has  said  it  ? 

A.    I  have  not  the  authority  by  me. 

Q.     Supposing  they  are  to  be  had,  you  can  easily  obtain  them? 

A.    I  have  the  authority  of  the  best  writers  upon  the  subject. 

Q.  I  am  asking  their  opinions,  and  the  deductions  which  they  are  able  to  show  ? 

A .  I  have  the  statements  of  men  who  have  collected  the  facts  on  this  subject, 
both  in  Europe  and  America,  and  I  have  recently  examined  the  statistics  in 
regard  to  the  proportion  of  deaths  from  this  cause. 

Q.    Where? 

A.    In  the  city  of  New  York. 

Q.     What  do  they  prove  ? 

A.  They  prove  that  just  in  proportion  as  bar-rooms  exist  in  some  of  the 
wards  of  New  York,  just  in  that  proportion  the  mortality  increases. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  in  any  sort  of  personal  fairness  between  man  and 
man,  that  is  an  answer  to  my  question  ?  I  was  not  asking  you  in  regard  to  the 
amount  of  drinking  at  the  Five  Points  bar-rooms  in  New  York.  I  asked  you 
to  give  me  the  results  of  careful  and  scientific  investigation  by  careful  and 
scientific  men  into  the  use  of  spirituous  liquors,  or  the  distilled  and  fermented 
liquors  in  all  human  society,  not  taking  out  the  most  objectionable  cases  ? 

A .  The  reason  why  I  answered  your  question  as  I  did,  is  because,  as  I 
said  before,  it  is  the  universal  opinion  of  scientific  men. 

Q.     Give  us  one  man  ? 

A.     Dr.  Lees,  of  Manchester,  England. 

Q.  Have  you  read  Dr.  Lees'  book  ?  Has  he  accumulated  any  scientific 
evidence  to  prove  that  ? 

A.     I  think  he  has,  sir. 

Q.     Then  I  pray  you  read  that  book  again. 

A.    I  think  his  views  are  most  conclusive  in  relation  to  the  use  of  alcohol. 

Q.  Have  you  examined  the  statistics  in  other  countries  ?  I  will  take 
Scotland,  for  instance,  which  has  the  reputation  of  more  drunkenness  than 
any  other  in  the  world.  Have  you  examined  the  statistics  of  the  registrar- 
general  of  Scotland  ? 

A.  I  have  not.  I  know  this  fact  as  stated  by  yourself:  that  a  large 
amount  of  whiskey  is  manufactured  in  Scotland.  I  think  some  Scotch  writers 
have  rather  denied  the  fact  that  Scotland  was  the  most  drunken  country.  A 
large  amount  is  exported  from  Scotland. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  it  testified  that  every  tenth  house  in  Glasgow  was  a 
place  where  liquor  was  sold  ? 

A.  That  is  a  statement  that  is  made  frequently.  But  all  these  statements 
are  more  or  less  calculations. 


752  APPENDIX. 

Q.  1  am  asking  you  the  statement  of  the  sheriff  of  the  county.  Are  you 
aware — for  I  think  you  know  something  .about  drunkenness — that  for  a  long 
period  it  was  the  universal  testimony  of  travellers  and  writers  in  respect  to 
Scotland,  that  whereas  it  was  an  extraordinarily  ascetic  country  in  respect  to 
its  theology,  it  was  the  loosest  country  in  the  Protestant  world,  certainly,  in 
respect  to  its  morality  in  that  direction,  and  also  in  the  direction  of  sensuality? 

A.    I  have  heard  that  statement  made. 

Q.  Now  do  you  know  what  has  been  the  result  to  which  the  recent 
investigation  of  the  registrar-general  has  conducted  his  mind  ? 

A.    I  am  not  aware  of  it. 

Q.  Now  are  you  aware  of  the  result  to  which  the  investigations  of  Dr. 
Brinton,  in  from  fifty  to  seventy  thousand  cases,  conducted  his  mind  ? 

A.     I  am  not  aware  of  the  result  of  his  investigation  in  that  matter. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  the  number  of  deaths  caused  by  delirium  tremens  is, 
in  this  country,  annually  ? 

A.  I  am  not  aware  ;  if  I  have  noticed  the  statements,  I  do  not  remember 
them  now. 

Q.  Do  you  know  the  number  of  deaths  ascribed  by  the  returns — I  am  not 
talking  about  guesses,  but  actual  cases  ascribed  by  the  government  returns  to 
intemperance  as  a  specific  cause  of  mortality  ? 

A .     I  should  not  rely  upon  the  returns. 

Q.     I  am  getting  at  the  statistics. 

A.     I  do  not  know  anything  about  it. 

Q.    It  is  very  easy  to  assume  a  position  theoretically. 

A.  What  I  mean  to  say  is  that  the  statistics  of  returns  are  very  defective 
oftentimes.  I  have  had  persons  die  of  delirium  tremens,  whom  I  have  been 
treating  ;  but  I  never  have  returned  a  case  from  that  cause.  They  die  from 
various  causes.  They  die  of  congestion  of  the  brain.  But  delirium  tremens 
was  the  primary  cause.  Consequently,  I  say,  that  it  is  our  duty  to  save  the 
feelings  of  the  friends  as  much  as  possible  ;  and  we  put  down  something  else 
when  we  make  the  returns. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  many  people  die  from  the  accidental  discharge  of 
fire-arms,  compared  with  the  number  of  those  who  die  from  delirium  tremens, 
and  from  intemperance  as  a  general  cause  ? 

A.  I  have  no  doubt  that  the  statistics  of  the  deaths  from  the  accidental 
discharge  of  fire-arms  may  be  credited  ;  but  in  regard  to  delirium  tremens,  I 
should  not  rely  upon  the  statistics  at  all. 

Q.  Are  you  acquainted  with  statistics  given  in  regard  to  the  number  of 
accidental  deaths  in  this  country  ? 

A.  There  are  statements  made  of  the  number  of  persons  who  die  from 
intemperance  ;  but  I  think  that  the  facts  are  not  known  positively. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  known  a  practising  physician  yourself,  who  made  it  a 
matter  of  inquiry,  for  many  years,  to  observe  in  his  own  practice,  and  in  the 
community,  the  effect  produced  by  indiscriminate  total  abstinence  upon 
patients,  and  the  effect  produced  by  moderate  drinking,  and  the  effects  pro- 
duced by  drunkenness,  with  a  view  of  extracting  a  final  conclusion  from  the 
broadest  basis  of  facts  ? 


APPENDIX.  753 

A.     There  may  be  such  statistics  prepared,  but  I  am  not  aware  of  them. 

Q.     Then  your  opinions  have  not  been  based  upon  any  such  investigations  ? 

A.  They  have  been  based  upon  such  observation  and  inquiry,  and  such 
statistics  as  have  come  within  my  means  of  observation. 

Q.  And  it  comes  to  this,  that  if  a  man  has  got  in  the  habit  of  drinking 
intoxicating  liquors,  it  is  a  dangerous  habit  for  him  V 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     And  if  a  man  drinks  too  much  it  will  hurt  him  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    And  the  world  is  full  of  dangers  and  evils  ? 

A.     There  is  no  other  evil  so  baleful  as  the  evil  ascribed  to  alcohol. 

Q.     Do  you  mean  to  say  that  ? 

A.     I  do  mean  to  say  it. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  that  there  is  no  other  evil  among  human  evils,  which  is 
the  occasion  of  more  mortality  than  the  evil  of  excessive  drinking  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  I  mean  that  it  is  greater  than  all  other  causes  combined. 

Q.     But  you  have  not  compared  it  with  sexuality  ? 

A.    It  is  merely  opinion. 

Q.     The  misery  from  sensuality  and  licentiousness  is  very  great  ? 

A.  But  from  my  observation  it  is  very  much  less  than  from  the  use  of 
alcohol. 

Q.  That  is  a  priori  reasoning,  and  observation  from  your  sphere,  and  that 
almost  totally  confined  to  the  care  and  cure  of  drunken  mania. 

A.     The  observation  of  nearly  a  lifetime,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  not  recognize  it  as  oftentimes  to  be  a  specific  and  independent 
disease  ? 

A.     No,  sir,  I  do  not  think  it  is. 

Q."  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  you  differ  from  the  medical  world  on  that 
question  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  mean  to  say  this  :  that  there  are  certain  organizations  that 
have  a  greater  affinity  for  alcohol,  or  that  alcohol  has  a  worse  effect  upon  some 
men  than  others,  and  such  men  it  subdues  and  destroys  quicker  ;  and  these 
men  are  generally  men  of  most  sensitive  organization.  For  instance,  I  might 
mention  distinguished  persons  who  have  become  intemperate.  We  oftentimes 
hear  it  said  that  they  are  persons  of  greater  intellect.  I  do  not  recognize 
that  as  being  true,  but  it  is  a  peculiarly  fine  organization.  These  persons  are 
more  likely  to  become  intemperate  than  persons  who  are  more  phelgmatic  in 
their  organization. 

Q.  But  is  it  not  also  true  that  such  persons  are  more  easily  made  the  vic- 
tims of  any  and  every  other  form  of  insanity  ? 

A.    It  may  be. 

Q.    In  fact,  after  all,  is  not  insanity  itself  a  disease  of  civilization  ? 

A.     Insanity  itself  is  a  disease  of  civilization. 

Q.  Now  I  am  talking  about  a  question  that  I  just  put  you  relating  to 
drunkenness,  as  you  find  it  developed  in  many  individual  cases  which  have 
come  under  your  observation,  and  which  seem  to  be  entirely  independent  of 
any  constant  or  daily  use  of  liquors,  or  even  occasional  use  as  a  matter  of 
luxury. 

95 


754  APPENDIX. 

A.  There  are  certain  persons  born  of  low  organizations, — for  instance, 
born  of  intemperate  parents  ;  such  persons  are  more  apt  to  become  drunkards 
than  others.  And  these  persons  are  more  apt  to  have  paroxysms  of  drunk- 
enness. And  you  will  find  them  usually  low  in  other  respects  ;  and  you  will 
find  them  irreligious  and  immoral.  We  recognize  that  fact ;  and  it  may  be 
that  in  such  persons,  born  of  intemperate  parents,  or  having  a  syphilitic  taint, 
there  is  a  tendency  which  might  produce  the  same  thing. 

Q.  Have  you  not  known  of  cases  of  men  of  habitual  abstinence  for  weeks 
and  months  together,  and  who,  just  as  certain  as  a  given  period  arrived,  would 
give  themselves  up  to  an  uncontrollable  fit  of  insane  drinking,  and  drink 
until  they  could  drink  no  longer,  and  then  lie  down  to  be  carried  off;  and 
then  resume  their  habit  of  abstinence  again  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  do  you  know  that  in  that  class  of  persons  they  are  led  by  some- 
thing entirely  aside  from  their  volition?  Have  you  not  observed  in  their 
sleep  and  dreams,  when  the  time  approaches,  a  nervous  and  physical  distrac- 
tion and  excitement  which  you  observe  in  some  other  forms  of  insanity  ? 

A.  I  have  observed  just  that  class  of  patients  ;  and  I  have  observed,  too, 
that  when  they  are  put  under  medical  treatment,  after  a  few  months  these 
paroxysms  coming  on  and  going  off,  they  gradually  loose  their  power,  and 
they  are  entirely  restored. 

Q.  And  many  of  them  are  capable  of  being  cured,  if  they  are  subjected  to 
medical  treatment  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  and  total  abstinence. 

Q.     These  are  cases  of  drunken  disease  in  the  system  ? 

A.  Not  a  drunken  disease,  per  se,  but  a  disease  induced  by  the  use  of 
alcohol. 

Q.     Or  developed  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  whether  it  is  developed  or  induced  ;  it  is  there. 

Q.  You  would  not  undertake  to  judge  mankind  by  these  exceptional  cases, 
would  you  ? 

A.  These  persons  just  mentioned  ?  I  would  not  attempt  to  judge  a  class 
of  drunkards  by  these. 

Q.     Nor  all  mankind  by  the  drunkards  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  You  recognize  the  fact,  do  you  not,  that  one  of  the  most  universal  ele- 
ments, next  to  air  and  water,  found  in  nature,  is  alcohol  ? 

A.     No,  sir,  I  do  not  recognize  that  fact.     I  believe  it  is  not  right. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  any  corner  of  the  earth  where  alcohol  in  some  form 
or  other  is  not  to  be  seen  or  found,  used  or  abused  ? 

A.  Well,  I  do  not  know  how  that  is.  One  thing  is  sure,  that  alcohol  is 
comparatively  a  modern  discovery  ;  I  do  not  know  exactly  the  time. 

Q.     Do  you  consider  the  days  of  Noah  as  modern  ? 

A.  I  believe  they  did  not  distil  liquor  then.  Of  course  there  is  a  certain 
process  of  fermentation  which  produces  intoxication. 

Q.  Is  not  wine  an  ordinance  of  nature  ?  Is  it  not,  by  an  ordinance  of 
nature,  almost  as  universal  as  nature  itself;  that  alcohol,  as  the  result  of  fer- 
mentation, if  not  of  distillation,  can  be  found  everywhere  ? 


APPENDIX.  755 

A.    It  is  found  in  all  liquor,  and  in  all  substances  fermented. 
Q.    Do  you  suppose  it  is  possible,  by  any  action  of  human  government, 
to  exclude  it  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  do  not  suppose  it  is  possible,  by  any  action  of  human  gov- 
ernment, to  exclude  a  natural  product. 

Q.     Or  exclude  it  from  the  ordinary  and  common  use  ? 

A.    Well,  I  do  not  suppose  that  it  is,  if  men  will  use  it. 
Q.    Exactly ;  and  do  you  not  suppose  that,  where  there  is  a  tea-kettle  and 
two  quarts  of  molasses,  they  can  make  it  as  well  as  they  can  a  cup  of  tea  ? 

A.     The  process  is  very  simple. 

Q.  Suppose  you  take  the  most  uncivilized  people.  Do  you  not  know  that, 
in  the  interior  of  Africa,  Dr.  Livingston  tells  us  that  the  people  take  the  palm 
tree,  and  draw  the  sweet  juice  from  it,  and  before  night  get  a  drink  of 
fermented  palm  toddy  ? 

A.  It  may  be  true.  Our  herbs  and  greens  in  the  spring  of  the  year  con- 
tain many  poisons,  if  we  were  to  extract  them.  Nevertheless,  they  are  food 
and  not  poison,  when  we  eat  them. 

Q,  Therefore  the  proper  course  for  man  to  pursue  is  to  avoid  the  abuse  of 
these  productions  or  results  of  nature,  and  to  use  them  according  to  their 
natural  design  and  use  ? 

A.  The  better  way  is  to  abstain  from  that  which  can  or  possibly  may 
injure,  and  eat  or  drink  that  from  which  he  can  derive  advantage. 

A.  I  suppose  that  you  never  felt  any  but  a  good  effect  from  eating  three 
slices  of  mutton  chop  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  that  I  have,  except,  perhaps,  from  indigestion. 

Q.     Suppose  you  had  eaten  thirteen  ? 

A.    But  excess  in  eating  and  drinking  are  different. 

Q.    Do  you  mean  to  say  that  there  is  nothing  like  gluttony  in  the  world  ? 

A.     Certainly  there  is. 

Q.  Do  you  think  the  Committee  is  to  believe  that  there  is  no  use  of  these 
stimulants  which  is  harmless  ? 

A.    Natural  food  and  unnatural  stimulants  are  two  different  things. 

Q.  But  who  taught  you  that  the  fermented  juice  of  the  grape  was  an 
unnatural  stimulant  ? 

A.     Then  it  is  something  else ;  it  is  not  the  juice  of  the  grape. 

Q.  Supposing  that  you  think  that  it  is  not  only  useless  but  unwise  and 
harmful  for  people  to  drink  it,  do  you  not  recognize  the  fact  of  the  universal 
presence  all  over  the  earth,  savage,  barbarous,  civilized,  and  refined  alike,  of 
these  results  of  fermentation,  if  not  of  distillation  ? 

A.  I  recognize  the  effect  of  a  natural  law,  but  not  a  fermentation.  It  did 
not  ferment  in  the  grape.  Nature  has  provided  an  air-tight  bottle  in  the  skin 
of  the  grape. 

Q.    But  nature  provides  for  breaking  the  bottle  ? 

A.    Not  always. 

Q.  Is  it  not,  after  all,  when  you  observe  the  presence,  within  anybody's 
reach,  everywhere  on  the  earth,  of  this  dangerous  and  seductive  form  of  a 
product  or  result  of  nature — is  it  not  at  best  the  merest  quackery ,to  endeavor 
through  human  legislation,  to  put  it  out  of  the  way?  Is  there  practically 


756  APPENDIX. 

the  least  chance  of  its  being  successful  in  the  long  run  ?    Or  is  there  anything 
on  the  earth  that  gives  the  least  promise  of  success  ? 

A.  It  is  impossible  for  me  to  answer  that.  It  is  impossible  to  tell  what 
there  may  be.  Of  course  there  is  a  reasonable  and  natural  course,  which 
legislation  may  pursue,  in  protecting  society  from  the  evil  influences  which 
destroy.  I  am  not  exactly  able  to  define  how  legislation  should  be  in  this 
matter  ;  but  of  course  it  should  be  -to  protect  the  rights  of  the  people.  We 
consider  ourselves  free,  every  man  to  eat  and  drink  what  he  pleases ;  yetv 
society  may  see  fit  to  say  that  a  man  shall  not  do  a  certain  thing,  if  not  doing 
it  is  for  the  good  of  the  whole.  That  seems  to  be  the  natural  way.  How  far 
this  may  go  I  will  not  undertake  to  say. 

Q.    You  will  not  undertake  to  describe  that  ? 
.A.    No,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  MARK  HOPKINS,  D.  D. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  The  Committee  would  like  to  hear  from  you  such 
observations  as  your  observation  will  allow  you  to  give,  in  a  practical  point  of 
view,  as  to  the  policy  the  State  should  adopt  as  regards  continuing  the  present 
prohibitory  law  or  adopting  a  license  law  ? 

A.  I  have  paid  no  special  attention  to  the  collection  of  facts  on  this  sub- 
ject. It  is  now  six  or  seven  years  since  the  law  was  passed,  and  when  it  was 
passed  the  temperance  people  in  Williamstown  had  a  meeting  and  appointed 
an  agent  to  prosecute  under  the  law,  or  to  see  that  the  law  was  enforced,  and 
Professor  Bascomb  was  appointed,  and  since  that  time  the  law  has  been  prac- 
tically enforced  there,  and  the  effect  of  it  has  been  decidedly  good.  I  asked 
him  to  state  to  me,  or  to  put  on  paper,  the  general  effects  that  came  under  his 
observation  in  connection  with  that  fact,  and  he  did  so.  He  has  been  agent 
for  six  or  seven  years  ;  and  I  would  say,  in  order  to  indicate  the  sort  of  mate- 
rial that  we  had  to  deal  with  in  the  matter,  that  when  he  was  appointed  a 
number  of  us  came  into  an  agreement  to  indemnify  him  for  any  injury  that 
he  might  receive  from  incendiary  fires  in  consequence  of  the  action  which  he 
might  take.  This  was  before  the  appointment  of  the  State  constables ;  since 
that  time  he  has  not  acted.  He  has  complained  of  some  eighteen  places  for 
selling  and  quite  a  number  of  cases  of  drunkenness,  and  in  most  all  cases  the 
suits  were  successful.  In  that  period  the  traffic  was  without  difficulty  driven 
into  obscurity,  wholly  arrested  and  confined  to  the  Irish.  The  benefit  of  the 
law  has  been  very  great  and  manifest.  At  the  commencement  of  the  prosecu- 
tions, both  hotels  and  the  restaurant  were  engaged  in  the  sale,  and  the  suit 
brought  them  to  terms  and  stopped  the  traffic.  The  traffic  has  been  held  in 
check  solely  by  the  law.  There  has  been  no  sale  during  this  time  to  offer 
any  temptation  to  the  young  or  to  the  temperate,  I  deem  the  law  to  have 
been  of  incalculable  benefit  to  us  thus  far  for  the  past  nine  years  and  now  to 
be  well  enforced.  I  believe  and  I  know  that  we  are  far  more  temperate  than 
the  adjoining  towns  in  New  York  who  are  under  a  license  system.  These  are 
the  facts,  as  stated  by  him.  My  opinion,  as  based  on  my  observation,  is  that 
the  law  has  worked  exceedingly  well  with  us.  We  think  it  would  be  a  great 
calamity  to  have  a  bar  opened  in  that  place.  I  do  not  know  how  far  I  am 
desired  to  go,  in  expressing  opinions  on  the  general  subject.  I  have  no  wish 


APPENDIX.  757 

to  volunteer  opinions  here,  though  I  am  willing  to  state  my  opinions  fully. 
These  are  facts  which  I  have  stated. 

Q.  Any  leading  considerations  in  your  mind  bearing  upon  this  subject 
would  be  profitable  to  the  Committee  ? 

A.  My  observation  of  the  object  of  the  law,  is  that,  except  incidentally,  it 
has  nothing  more  to  do  with  the  preservation  of  morals  than  the  law  against 
stealing  has.  It  stands,  in  that  respect,  precisely  upon  the  same  basis ;  but  it 
is  a  question  of  the  rights  of  man,  and  I  do  not  know  why  a  business  should 
be  authorized  which  takes  money,  in  order  to  pay  for  the  vices  or  poverty 
which  it  causes,  out  of  my  pocket,  any  more  than  why  a  law  should  authorize 
and  enable  a  man  to  come  and  put  his  hand  into  my  pocket  and  take  out  money. 
I  suppose  a  law  is  based  on  the  rights  of  men,  and  in  the  same  way  may 
benefit  a  person,  the  same  as  a  law  against  stealing  may.  I  suppose  it  is  for 
the  Legislature  to  decide  whether  it  will  or  not.  If  it  will,  I  suppose  it  is 
enacted  on  the  ground  of  protecting  the  rights  of  men  and  their  property. 

Q.     And  incidentally  promote  their  welfare  ? 

A.  That  is  a  question  as  to  the  proper  provisions  of  legislation  ;  but  I  con- 
sider the  basis  of  legislation  is  the  protection  of  men  in  their  rights,  and  that 
the  community  have  rights  in  this  matter,  and  have  a  right  to  be  protected 
from  the  payment  of  taxes  for  the  vices  and  poverty  produced  by  any  busi- 
ness whatever. 

Q.  What  is  your  view  with  regard  to  such  a  law  affording  incidental  pro" 
tection  to  the  welfare  and  well-being  of  the  community  ? 

A .  I  think  the  community  have  the  same  right  to  prevent  temptation  to 
the  young,  which  cannot  be  rebutted  by  argument,  from  the  exposure  of  intox- 
icating drinks,  as  they  have  to  prevent  the  exposure  to  indecent  pictures ; 
and  I  think  that  incidentally  the  effect  is  important  on  the  welfare  of  the 
community. 

Q.  Does  the  problem  labor  in  your  mind  in  regard  to  trenching  on  the 
rights  of  the  community  under  this  law ;  that  is,  do  you  feel  that  the  principle 
of  the  law,  broadly  considered,  is  open  to  the  objection  of  trenching  upon  the 
rights  of  the  community,  or  how,  on  the  whole,  does  it  lie  in  your  mind  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  the  principle  of  the  law  is  for  the  protection  of  the 
rights  of  the  community. 

Q.  If  there  is  any  consideration  that  you  desire  to  add,  we  would  be  happy 
to  hear. 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  have  anything.  I  have  no  faith  whatever  in  any 
efficacy  of  the  license  law  as  restraining  the  sale.  I  would  express  that  opin- 
ion, and  I  would  say  that  in  all  respects,  so  far  as  I  have  opportunity  to 
observe  the  general  result  in  public  gatherings  with  us,  as  in  town  meetings, 
everything  of  that  kind  has  been  highly  favorable.  The  aspect  of  such  meet- 
ing has  been  changed  since  this  law  has  been  in  operation,  and  the  opinion  of 
very  many  who  have  had  opinions  upon  the  effects  of  the  law,  I  know  has 
been  changed  in  favor  of  the  law  in  connection  with  its  workings  as  seen  with 
us. 

Q.  The  proposition  presented  in  mere  outline  is  to  give  discretionary 
powers  on  the  subject  to  the  various  municipalities  in  the  Commonwealth.  Do 
you  perceive  anything  objectionable  in  that  feature  ? 


758  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  do  not  think  I  am  sufficiently  acquainted  with  the  relations  of  the 
different  parties  to  express  an  opinion. 

Q.  The  question  I  intended  to  raise  more  particularly,  was  whether  you 
would  deem  that  the  several  towns  and  cities  would  stand  as  fair  a  chance  to 
protect  themselves  against  the  evils  of  the  traffic  when  the  power  was  lodged 
in  the  several  municipalities,  as  they  would  to  have  it  lodged  in  the  Common- 
wealth itself? 

A.  My  opinion  would  be  worth  very  little  on  that  subject,  but  my  impres- 
sion is  that  I  should  not. 

Q.  Licenses  being  granted  in  one  town,  how  would  it  affect  another 
town  where  it  was  not  licensed  ? 

A.    It  would  injure,  undoubtedly. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  You  do  not  ascribe  an  evil  which  society  suffers, 
to  the  mere  presence  of  alcoholic  liquors  ?  The  remedy  you  propose  would 
not  be  to  banish  alcoholic  liquids,  would  it  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Therefore  we  have  to  assume  the  constant  presence  in  the  community 
of  a  large  quantity  of  alcoholic  liquids,  pretty  well  distributed  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  of  the  quantity  of  liquids  now  used  according  to  the 
provision  of  existing  law,  necessarily  used  by  manufacturers  and  in  the 
arts,  and  that  are  thus  distributed  throughout  all  the  municipalities,  and  in  all 
the  workshops  of  Massachusetts  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    You  do  not  know  how  that  is  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Then  you  have  not  taken  that  into  C9nsideration  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  I  have. 

Q.     Then  do  you  or  do  you  not  propose  to  banish  these  entirely  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Then  the  evil  of  the  presence  of  these  things  in  society,  and  their  large 
and  general  distribution,  is  an  evil  not  to  be  got  rid  of? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  then  ?  Are  these  things  to  remain,  and  be  dis- 
tributed in  the  workshops  and  manufactories  throughout  the  community  ? 

A.     I  mean  that  they  are  to  remain  and  be  distributed. 

Q.     Then  it  is  widely  distributed ;  that  is  plain. 

A.  Yes,  sir;  it  is  a  distribution  in  so  much  that  it  is  a  temptation  and 
can  be  got  at ;  but  I  think  it  is  not  made  respectable  to  drink  it,  and  that 
it  is  not  made  a  temptation  to  be  put  into  the  hands  of  these  people  who  have 
these  proclivities  to  drink  it. 

Q.  We  will  assume  that  it  is  respectable  ;  but  when  we  consider  that  it 
enters  into  the  walls  of  this  room,  and  that  it  is  used  to  clean  your  coat,  and 
that  it  was  used  in  making  your  hat,  and  that  it  was  used  in  the  manufacture 
of  your  Bible  and  spelling-book,  and  that  it  is  so  widely  distributed  through- 
out the  community  that  there  is  scarcely  any  craftsman  who  does  not  handle 
it,  you  would  not  think  that  it  would  be  so  banished  as  not  to  be  within  the 
reach  of  a  very  large  class  of  the  community  ? 


APPENDIX.  759 

A.  I  should  not  assume  to  banish  it  from  this  table,  or  from  the  walls  of 
this  room. 

Q.     But  it  was  in  the  man's  hands  before  ? 

A.     I  should  not  expect  to  banish  it  from  any  of  the  products  of  nature. 

Q.  Then  the  thing  which  you  want  to  accomplish  is  to  prevent  its  being 
offered  for  sale  at  saloons,  bars,  or  tippling-shops,  and  under  such  circum- 
stances as  to  operate  as  a  specific  seduction  upon  society?  Is  that  the 
ground  upon  which  you  wish  to  stand  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  you  would  go  for  any  law  that  would  be  successful  in  meeting  the 
tide  of  intemperance,  and  which  would  be  practically  the  best  law  for  the 
cause  of  temperance  ? 

A.  That  is  the  result  which  I  wish  to  reach.  I  should  wish  to  reach  that, 
but  I  should  not  wish  to  have  an  immorality  licensed. 

Q.  But  the  immorality  is  not  in  the  existence  of  the  article  nor  in  the 
proper  sale  of  the  article,  but  the  immorality  consists  in  the  abuse  of  it  and  in 
the  wrongful  and  seductive  sale  of  it ;  is  not  that  so  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  it  can  be  licensed,  according  to  any  impression  that  I 
have  of  the  license  system  as  it  existed,  without  having  these  evils  follow. 

Q.  Then  that  is  the  opinion  that  follows  from  a  preconception  of  a  certain 
kind  of  license  law,  and  not  from  a  possible  kind  of  license  law  ? 

A .  I  suppose  that  there  must  be  a  license  on  the  part  of  any  law.  There 
has  been  under  this  law.  There  has  always  been  a  person  licensed  in  the 
towns  to  sell,  and  I  suppose  that  is  to  continue. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  that  under  this  very  law  licenses  are  granted  for 
persons  to  distil  New  England  rum  to  be  sold  without  reserve  to  go  out  of 
the  State,  the  sale  to  be  in  quantities  of  not  less  than  thirty  gallons  at  a 
time? 

A.     I  have  not  examined  the  law  carefully. 

Q.  Then,  so  far  as  a  moral  testimony  of  the  law  is  concerned,  regarding 
it  as  an  abstract  moral  testimony,  you  observe  that  the  law  of  Massachusetts, 
as  it  is  now  written  on  the  books,  is  a  law  which  authorizes  the  distillation  of 
Medford  rum,  to  be  sent  to  all  parts  of  the  world,  the  heathen  inclusive  ? 

A.    I  am  sorry  for  it. 

Q.     This  is  the  very  law  which  your  law  proposes  to  sustain  ? 

A.    I  do  not  propose  to  sustain  it  by  any  law  at  all. 

Q.  I  am  glad  to  know  how  you  stand  upon  this  point.  It  will  have  a 
great  weight  with  the  people  of  Massachusetts. 

A.  I  hope  that  I  shall  be  fairly  dealt  with  here,  sir,  and  that  if  I  have 
said  anything  inadvertently  that  a  sense  will  not  be  given  to  it  that  I 
did  not  intend. 

Q.    If  there  is  anything  doubtful  I  will  endeavor  to  make  it  perfectly  clear. 

A.     I  do  not  understand  what  opinion  you  understand  me  to  entertain. 

Q.     In  what  respect  ? 

A.     In  respect  to  the  present  law. 

Q.  I  understand  that  you  came  here  to  testify  for  the  purpose  of  lending 
the  weight  of  your  opinion  and  great  character,  and  influence,  and  intelligence 
in  support  of  the  existing  legislation  as  written  upon  the  statute  book. 


760  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  did  not  come  here  with  any  such  purpose.  I  came  here  to  answer 
questions  which  may  be  put  to  me. 

Q.  Now  you  were  kind  enough  to  give  us  some  of  the  facts  which  you  had 
secured  from  Professor  Bascomb.  Are  you  aware  that  we  had  your  Treasurer, 
the  Hon.  Joseph  White,  a  few  days  ago,  to  testify  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Then  you  are  not  aware  that  your  adjoining  towns  in  New  York  were 
more  reliable  than  Williamstown  ? 

A.     I  have  not  known  of  the  testimony. 

Q.  When  I  examined  him  as  to  the  opportunities  of  getting  liquor  in 
Williarnstown,  he  admitted  that  nearly  every  year  since  the  law  was  passed, 
in  tjie  town  of  Adams,  it  was  easy  to  get  liquor  in  many  places,  and  that  you 
could  get  it  by  sending  down  to  Pittsfield,  and  that  it  was  easy  to  send  to 
Vermont  or  to  Springfield  ;  and  I  asked  him  if  it  could  be  got  in  the  neigh- 
boring towns  across  the  line,  in  New  York,  and  he  said  that  you  would  have 
to  send  to  Troy,  because,  as  he  said,  our  neighbors  in  New  York  are  more 
reliable  than  they  are  with  us. 

A.     I  have  not  known  of  the  testimony. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  When  you  say  that  you  did  not  come  here  to 
uphold  any  particular  law,  do  you  mean  to  say  that  you  have  no  preference 
between  the  prohibitory  or  the  license  law  ? 

A.    I  have  a  decided  preference  for  prohibition,  sir. 

Q.  The  Governor  tells  you  that  the  present  law  authorizes  the  selling  of 
liquors  to  be  carried  beyond  the  State,  and  to  be  used  out  of  the  State,  for 
common  purposes.  Is  it  not  manifest  that  the  law  intends  to  give  merely  to 
manufacturers  the  ordinary  benefits  of  legitimate  commerce  ;  and  as  these 
are  lawful  purposes  in  the  State,  so  these  are  lawful  purposes  beyond  the 
State.  Would  you  not  think  it  expedient,  under  these  circumstances,  to 
allow  this  manufacture  for  purposes  beyond  the  limits  of  the  State,  leaving 
those  States  to  regulate  it  for  themselves  ? 

A.  That  is  one  of  those  broad  subjects  which  I  have  not  investigated,  and 
I  do  not  suppose  my  opinion  would  be  of  any  particular  value. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  McCLELLAN.)  I  think  you  stated  that  it  would  be  a  great 
calamity  to  have  persons  licensed  in  your  town  ? 

A.     I  should,  sir,  think  it  a  great  calamity. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  Do  you  think  that  your  town  would  probably  vote 
to  license  persons  to  sell  liquor,  under  the  plan  proposed  by  this  system  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  anything  about  that.  I  do  not  think  that  the  native 
population  would. 

Q.  Should  you  think  that  it  was  the  sense  of  the  majority  of  the  public 
that  they  would  or  would  not  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know,  sir  ;  there  is  a  very  considerable  number  of  voters  who 
are  Irish  and  formerly  interested  in  the  sale.  That  proportion  would  go  for 
the  sale.  What  the  proportion  is  exactly,  I  do  not  know. 

Q,  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Since  the  existing  statutes  of  Massachusetts 
authorize  the  licensing  of  distilleries  for  the  production  of  New  England 
rum  and  other  liquors  to  be  sold  to  anybody  who  wants  them  for  use  in  manu- 
factures or  in  the  arts,  and  the  like,  in  quantities  not  less  than  thirty  gallons, 


APPENDIX.  761 

do  you  think  it  is  desirable  for  the  legislation  of  Massachusetts  to  be  so 
framed  as  to  encourage  and  increase  distillation  in  the  State,  and  turn  away 
capital  and  our  industry  in  the  direction  of  distillation  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Now  assuming  that  we  have  to  use  five  or  ten  millions  of  gallons 
annually  in  the  manufactures  and  in  the  arts,  which  must  be  procured  from 
somewhere,  do  you  not  think  it  better  that  the  manufacturers  and  artisans  of 
Massachusetts  should  be  left  free  to  buy  the  best  articles  in  the  cheapest 
markets,  rather  than  that  they  should  be  confined  to  the  purchase  of  them 
from  certain  pet  State  distilleries  or  certain  authorized  distillers  in  the 
State,  or  from  State  agencies  as  a  matter  of  profit  to  the  State  ? 

A.  I  have  no  particular  interest  in  that  question,  and  I  have  no  particular 
means  of  answering  it. 

Q.  Then  you  do  not  see  any  objection  to  allowing  the  ordinary  rules  of 
political  economy  and  the  rightful  purchase,  and  use,  and  employment  of 
these  things  in  the  arts  and  manufactures  ? 

A .  Certainly,  so  far  as  these  things  are  employed  in  the  arts,  I  see  no  rea- 
son why  they  should  not  be  used  in  the  same  way  as  other  things  are  provided. 

Q.  But  you  would  not  undertake  to  make  legislation,  the  tendency  of 
which  would  be  to  turn  off  manufacture  into  places  where  it  does  not  natu- 
rally go  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HENRY  L.  SABIN,  M.  D. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  How  many  years  have  you  resided  in  Williams- 
town  ? 

A.     Thirty-nine  years. 

Q.    You  are  a  practising  physician  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Will  you  state,  in  a  few  words,  your  opinions  in  reference  to  the  ques- 
tion of  license  or  prohibition,  involving  any  remarks  you  may  be  disposed  to 
make-  as  to  the  influence  of  alcoholic  beverages  upon  the  individual  health 
and  individual  wealth  of  the  community  ? 

A.  I  am  in  favor  of  prohibition,  for  the  reason  that  I  have  always  found 
the  use  of  alcoholic  drinks  prejudicial  to  the  health  of  the  community,  and 
productive  of  disease,  poverty,  and  trouble. 

Q.  You  have  heard  the  testimony  that  has  been  given  touching  your  own 
town.  Have  you  any  modification  to  make  in  regard  to  the  operation  of  the 
law? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  When  I  commenced  business  in  the  town  of  Williamstown, 
thirty-nine  years  ago,  it  was  found  that  there  was  sold  at  our  stores  about 
eleven  thousand  dollars'  worth  of  rum  every  year.  The  subject  has  been  agi- 
tated in  our  town  from  that  time  to  the  present.  We  have  taken  the  vote  a 
great  many  times  upon  the  subject  of  licensing  in  our  town.  We  always 
carry  it  by  an  overwhelming  majority. 

Q.     Against  license  ? 

A.  Against  licenses  of  all  kinds.  I  think  some  twenty  years  ago,  when  the 
subject  was  agitated  a  great  deal  in  our  own  town  at  our  county  temperance 
96 


762  APPENDIX. 

meeting,  it  was  agitated  in  regard  to  selling  in  the  county.  Our  temperance 
society  chose  three  men  to  go  through  the  county  and  discuss  the  subject  of 
temperance  ;  and  I  believe  I  was  one  of  the  number.  I  spent  three  weeks 
from  home,  preparatory  to  going  before  the  county  commissioners  in  the 
spring.  We  spent  three  days  before  the  county  commissioners.  We  have  not 
had  a  license  granted  by  our  county  commissioners  from  that  time  to  this. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  touching  the  plan  proposed,  to  give  discretionary 
powers  to  the  various  municipalities  of  the  State  ? 

A.  I  am  decidedly  opposed  to  that,  from  the  fact  that  I  have  experienced 
the  evils  of  it.  Why  the  thing  was  so  marked  in  my  mind  was  that  there  is 
quite  a  number  of  young  men  in  our  town  who  formerly  went  to  school  to 
me,  and  whom  I  was  formerly  interested  in,  and  who  were  formerly  men  of 
property,  but  would  sometimes  drink  too  much,  a  great  deal  too  much,  and 
thus  cause  trouble  in  their  families.  Being  a  doctor,  I  have  had  a  great 
many  opportunities  of  acquaintance  with  the  families  of  the  people  of  the 
place.  I  have  found  that  these  men  would  go  to  an  adjoining  town  and  get 
drunk.  A  number  of  these  families  have  begged  me  to  put  my  face  against 
the  whole  thing ;  because  if  these  men  went  to  Pittsfield  to  cattle  shows, 
they  would  get  drunk,  while  if  they  were  confined  to  our  place,  it  -would  not 
be  so  much.  Of  course  there  are  some  places  in  the  town  where  they  can  get 
it,  but  not  so  much. 

Q.  As  a  physician,  would  you  restrict  your  condemnation  to  what  is  com- 
monly caused  from  excessive  use  ? 

A.  I  do  not  use  a  great  deal  of  it.  I  use  it  somewhat,  but  I  do  not  use  it 
as  much  as  others  do.  The  question  has  been  asked  in  reference  to  the  use 
of  brandy  in  typhoid  fevers.  I  can  say  that  I  have  not  lost  a  case,  in  ten 
years,  except  one.  I  use  nothing  stronger  than  port  wine  or  quinine.  I  do 
not  use  brandy,  I  do  not  use  rum,  and  I  do  not  want  it,  and  my  patients  get 
along  well ;  and  I  tell  my  neighboring  physicians  that  I  get  along  better. 
That  is  my  opinion  in  regard  to  it. 

Q.    Do  you  regard  them  as  hurtful  or  healthful,  used  in  moderation  ? 

A.     I  consider  them  hurtful. 

Q.    Do  you  lay  that  down  as  a  rule  ? 

A.    I  would  lay  that  down  as  a  rule. 

Q.     Would  you  include  wine  ? 

A.     I  would  include  any  liquors. 

Q.  You  would  not  deem  the  measure  of  imperfection  of  health  a  justifica- 
tion of  the  evil  ? 

A .     I  should  not. 

Q.    But  you  would  think  them  harmful  in  life  ? 

A .    1  would. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  How  long  since  there  has  been  any  license  in  Berk- 
shire County  ? 

A.     Our  commissioners  have  not  licensed  since  the  time  which  I  spoke  of. 

Q.     How  long  ago  was  that  ? 

A..   I  think  it  was  about  twenty  years. 


APPENDIX.  763 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  that  under  any  system  of  legislation,  if  the  ques- 
tion of  license  were  left  to  the  people  of  Berkshire  County  as  it  was  then, 
there  would  be  any  license  ? 

A.  I  do  not  believe  Berkshire  County  would'  grant  licenses.  I  would  say 
this,  sir :  that  previous  to  the  question  being  considered  here,  if  it  had  been 
left  to  the  people,  I  do  not  know  what  the  people  would  have  done ;  but  I 
find  as  I  go  about  the  country,  that  some  who  have  been  vacillating  with 
regard  to  the  propriety  of  having  a  license,  are  now  decided  that  they 
should  not  favor  it — that  what  has  been 'going  on  in  this  State  House  has  con- 
vinced them  of  the  evils  of  the  thing. 

Q.  There  would  be  no  doubt  if  that  thing  were  left  to  the  people  of  your 
county  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  it  would. 

Q.  If  the  present  law  remained,  would  it  make  any  difference  in  the  prac- 
tical results  in  your  county,  with  the  same  means  of  enforcement,  whether 
the  prohibition  came  from  the  action  of  the  people  or  from  the  action  of  the 
State  ? 

A.  Well,  I  do  not  think,  sir,  that  we  should  ever  have  any  different  con- 
dition oi*  the  sale  of  ardent  spirits  in  our  county  than  at  present.  I  think 
this  Constabulary  system  is  doing  the  thing  entirely. 

Q.  Yes,  sir;  and  nobody  proposes  to  set  aside  the  means  here  used. 
Provided  that  the  people  of  the  towns  say  that  they  do  not  want  it,  and  you 
say  that  your  county  would  not  license,  and  if  you  then  had  the  very  means 
here  employed  would  it  make  any  difference  among  the  great  mass  of  your 
people,  whether  the  permission  to  sell  was  withheld  by  a  law  of  the  State  or 
by  the  action  of  the  people  of  the  county  ?  • 

A .    No,  sir  ;  but  I  should  be  very  sorry  to  have  Massachusetts  go  back. 

Q.    Well,  will  you  be  kind  enough,  if  you  please,  to  give  us  your  opinion. 

A.     Give  me  your  question  exactly. 

Q.  The  question  was,  so  far  as  the  question  of  temperance  is  concerned, 
as  a  beverage  or  anything  else,  in  Berkshire  County  (and  you  say  that  you 
had  no  licenses  granted),  would  it  make  any  difference  if  that  power  was 
withheld  by  the  action  of  the  people  of  the  county,  or  whether  it  was  with- 
held by  the  action  of  the  State  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  think  it  would  make  a  great  difference.  And  I  do  not 
want,  after  men  have  taken  the  stand  that  they  have,  that  we  should  have  it 
come  into  Berkshire  County  as  a  test  question.  I  think  it  would  tend  to  injure 
public  morals.  It  would  tend  to  demoralize  the  whole  thing.  As  to  the  pre- 
cise effect  upon  the  people  in  our  town,  it  would  not  be  the  same  whether  it 
came  from  one  kind  of  people  or  another.  I  think  persons  would  drink  more 
and  that  more  would  be  sold. 

Q.     Would  drink  more  ? 

A.     Where  they  could  get  it.     Drink  in  Pittsfielcf,  if  you  please. 

Q.     Is  there  any  difficulty  in  getting  it  in  New  York,  or  in  Vermont  ? 

A.  There  are  no  licenses  at  all  in  Vermont.  And  I  was  told  that  in  the 
town  of  Pownal,  they  were  going  to  stop  the  sale  entirely.  And  there  is  an 
organization  in  Bennington  by  which  they  will  entirely  stop  it. 


764  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Has  there  been  any  difficulty  in  getting  liquors  in  Troy,  or  in  Boston, 
all  that  is  wanted  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Would  they  not  get  it  in  Boston  if  it  was  licensed,  or  if  it  was  not 
licensed  ?  What  difference  does  it  make  whether  it  is  licensed  or  not  ? 

A.  In  our  place  the  leading  men  do  not  drink.  Those  who  drink  are  Irish ; 
and  they  cannot  send  to  Boston  to  get  it. 

Q.  Has  there  ever  been  a  time  under  the  prohibitory  system,  when  they 
could  not  get  all  they  wanted  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     They  do  not  get  it  from  Berkshire  I  suppose  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  they  do  not  get  it  from  Berkshire. 

(2-     They  do  not  get  it  from  Williamstown,  but  they  do  get  it,  do  they  not? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  With  a  license  law,  if  people  please  to  get  it  in  Troy,  there  will  be  no 
difficulty  in  getting  it,  will  there  ? 

A.  They  can  get  it  in  Troy  or  Boston  ;  but  we  are  not  any  further  off 
from  Boston  or  from  Troy  than  we  were  ten  years  ago.  And  yet,  as  Dr. 
Hopkins  has  just  stated  here  upon  the  stand,  one  of  the  largest  town  meetings 
that  we  ever  held  in  our  town  was  this  spring;  and  the  same  question 
came  up  there  that  agitated  the  community ;  and  I  do  not  think  there  was  a 
man  in  our  town  meeting  who  had  drank  anything — 

Q,  What  I  wanted  to  inquire  was,  if  since  the  piohibitory  law  in  your 
county  does  not  prevent  people  from  getting  liquor  in  Troy  and  Boston,  it 
would  be  any  worse  for  you  whether  they  got  it  in  Troy  or  in  Boston  under  a 
license  system,  or  otherwise  ? 

A.     If  they  get  it  in  Troy,  they  will  drink  it. 

Q.  But  if  you  assume  that  they  can  get  it  in  all  these  places,  how  is  it 
going  to  produce  a  benefit? 

A.  I  assume  that  all  these  places  are  to  be  shut  up.  And  I  assume  further- 
more that  if  I  was  in  the  town  of  Pittsfield,  and  could  associate  with  me  forty 
men  there,  I  could  shut  up  every  place  there. 

Q.  Then  you  would  have  it  so  that  nobody  could  get  it  ?  That  is,  you 
would  expect  to  accomplish  that  by  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that,  by  this  law  or  any  other,  such  a  state  of  things 
eould  exist  ? 

A.     Well,  sir,  if  I  live  until  the  millennium,  I  might. 

Q.     Then  the  law  is  not  going  to  destroy  the  use  of  liquors  ? 

A.  Only  just  so  far  as  the  people  rise  up  and  sustain  it.  There  are  two 
ways  :  one  is,  that  they  cannot  get  it,  and  the  other  is  that  the  poor  drunkard 
shall  see  that  those  to  whom  they  look  are  sincere  in  their  efforts  to  stop  the 
sale. 

Q.  If  these  people  find  that  a  large  portion  of  the  people  in  the  community 
(people  in  the  higher  walks  of  life,  if  you  prefer  to  use  that  term)  are  in  the 
habit  of  using  it,  can  you  reclaim  them  under  this  system  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  I  think  we  can.  I  will  say  this:  I  was  in  Pittsfield  three 
weeks  ago,  and  I  met  a  man  there  who  said  to  me,  We  have  got  an  organi- 


APPENDIX.  765 

zation  going  on  in  this  place,  and  we  have  got  seventy-five  members  in  it 
now.  I  knew  him  to  be  a  drunkard.  And  we  are  taking  in,  he  said,  some  ten 
or  fifteen  more  each  night,  and  we  shall  have  an  organization  which  will  show 
that  the  liquor  can  be  taken  care  of.  And  that  society  originated  in  the  lower 
class  of  society. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  it  is  as  easy  to  enforce  any  law  in  Boston  as  it  is  in 
Berkshire  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  and  I  do  not  think  it  is  as  easy  in  Pittsfield  as  it  is  in  Wil- 
liarastown. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  is,  without  the  co-operation  of  the  people  in  these 
different  places  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  suppose  the  fact  to  be  such  that  under  a  certain  system  of  legis- 
lation you  can  procure  it,  and  that  under  another  you  cannot.  Which  would 
you  prefer  ? 

A.    I  would  prefer  to  have  legislative  action  right. 

Q.    Irrespective  of  right  ? 

A.     It  would  be  right. 

Q.  But  if  it  is  in  Boston,  it  is  more  difficult.  Do  you  think  the  people  of 
Boston  cannot  as  well  judge  in  regard  to  themselves  as  they  can  in  Berk- 
shire ? 

A*  If  I  was  an  inhabitant  of  the  city  of  Boston,  it  would  be  the  first  busi- 
ness of  my  life  to  go  to  one  good  man  and  another  throughout  the  city,  and 
I  would  work  while  I  lived,  to  bring  up  the  public  to  such  a  standard. 

Q.     But  must  it  not  be  left  to  the  people  of  Boston  ? 

A.    It  must  be  left  to  the  people,  and  good  people  must  be  responsible. 

Q.  Will  the  prohibitory  law,  without  this  co-operation,  have  any  material 
effect  ? 

A.     They  must  go  together. 

Q.  Then  what  you  desire  in  Boston  is  to  secure  the  co-operation  of  every- 
body to  exert  an  influence  on  this  side  ? 

A.     We  want  a  law,  and  then  we  want  that. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  is  calculated  to  produce  that  co-operation,  by  a  statute 
on  your  statute  book,  which  implies  that  all  persons  who  use  it  are  on  all 
occasions  guilty  of  an  offence  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  as  you  are  going  to  put  anything  on  the  statement.  I 
answer  that  I  would  not  give  a  body  alcohol  or  prussic  acid. 

Q.  Now,  I  want  to  know  if  you  think  it  is  at  all  probable  that  these  gen- 
tlemen will  come  and  lend  their  co-operation,  while  they  are  held  out  by  the 
law  of  the  State  as  guilty  of  moral  wrong,  crime  and  sin  in  drinking  ? 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SABIN.)     Which  class  of  people  ?     The  rumsellers  ? 

A.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     No,  sir,  people  of  the  community. 

A.  Why  I  should  think  that  the  good  people  of  the  city  of  Boston  would 
come  right  up  to  the  sustaining  of  the  law  at  once.  I  recollect,  in  1857, 
sitting  here  in  this  very  place,  and  my  friend,  Mr.  Day,  was  in  the  lower  house,  in 
which  this  subject  was  before  us  ;  and  I  never  was  so  affected  as  I  was,  in  the 
committee  upon  the  subject,  to  hear  the  testimony  of  old  Father  Cleveland, 
relating  what  he  was  doing  in  the  city  of  Boston.  I  must  say  I  sat  and 


766  APPENDIX. 

« 

cried  under  the  old  man's  testimony.  I  asked  him  where  he  got  money,  and 
he  said  that  when  he  got  out  of  money  he  went  up  to  Amos  Lawrence,  and 
he  was  always  ready  to  give  him  fifty  or  a  hundred  dollars  to  sustain  him  while 
he  was  helping  to  lead  up  the  poor  drunkards. 

Q.    Is  there  any  considerable  amount  used  in  Berkshire  County  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  they  give  ten  dollars  a  barrel  for  it  for  manufacturing  pur- 
poses. 

Q.     Do  they  drink  very  much  ? ' 

A.     They  do  some. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MORSE.)     You  would  not  have  any  legislation  about  it  ? 

A.     I  would  let  it  stand  just  as  it  is. 

Q.  You  think  that  a  person  who  is  fortunate  enough  to  live  in  the  country 
can  make  his  own  cider  and  use  it,  while  the  man  who  lives  in  Boston  is  not 
to  be  allowed  to  purchase  it  ? 

A.  That  is  a  matter  that  I  cannot  legislate  upon.  I  think  this  cider 
business  is  pretty  miserable  business.  I  labored  with  a  man  in  our  place  (for 
I  /have  labored  some  in  this  cause),  to  stop  his  drinking  cider.  He  had 
stopped  everything  else.  But  his  wife  said  to  me  one  day, — "  For  mercy's 
sake,  do  let  that  man  go  to  drinking  rum  again,  but  don't  let  him  drink 
cider,  for  he  is  sour  and  cross  all  the  time  now."  I  think  drinking  cider  is 
pretty  bad  business. 

Q.  You  admit  the  difficulty  of  managing  this  thing  in  Boston  ?  What 
difficulty  do  you  see  in  having  the  law  so  modified  as  to  leave  to  the  people 
of  Boston  themselves  to  determine  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  about  Boston.  You  do  too  large  a  business  for  me 
here. 

•  Q.  You  say  that  the  law  cannot  be  carried  out  without  this  sentiment  on 
the  part  of  the  people  ? 

A.  I  think  the  state  of  things  in  Boston,  the  hub  of  the  State,  and  the 
"  hub  of  the  universe,"  may  be  illustrated  by  a  story,  if  I  may  be  permitted 
to  tell  a  story  here  to  illustrate.  An  old  lady  was  talking  with  her  minister 
in  regard  to  total  depravity.  She  thought  that  people  were  all  totally 
depraved.  And  the  minister  asked  her  if  she  thought  that  she  was  totally 
depraved  herself.  Said  she,  "  if  you  take  away  my  total  depravity,  there  is 
nothing  left  of  me."  And  if  it  is  going  to  destroy  Boston  to  take  away  rum, 
I  do  not  know  what  is  to  be  left  of  it. 

Q.     You  would  not  then  be  willing  to  leave  her  to  take  care  of  herself  ? 

A.    No,  sir.     Boston  is  a  part  of  me. 

Q.     You  think  you  can  manage  it  up  in  Berkshire  County  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  but  I  have  my  ideas  of  the  propriety  of  things  in  Boston, 
even  living  up  in  Berkshire  County,  as  well  as  if  I  lived  here. 

Q.  But  you  are  not  quite  willing  to  leave  us  to  take  care  of  ourselves,  as 
you  are  to  leave  the  people  up  in  Berkshire  County  to  take  care  of  them- 
selves ? 

A .    1  want  to  have  it  just  the  same. 


APPENDIX.  76T 

TESTIMONY  OF  G.  F.  LEWIS. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     Where  do  you  reside  ? 

A.  In  Cleveland,  Ohio.  I  am  representative  of  a  banking  house  in 
Detroit,  Michigan. 

Q.  You  are  connected  with  a  business  firm  which  buys  the  scrip  of  the 
agricultural  colleges. 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  our  house  purchases  the  scrip  of  the  agricutural  colleges  of 
the  different  States. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  know  the  state  of  the  temperance  feeling  in  Ohio.  Is 
it  rising  ? 

A.  It  is  very  strongly  rising  among  the  people  West,  especially  among  the 
Christian  people,  and  those  anxious  to  advance  Christianity. 

Q.     What  is  your  law  in  Ohio  ? 

A.  I  can  hardly  tell  you  the  details  of  our  law.  We  had  a  license  law 
for  a  time,  but  we  found  that  it  did  not  work  well,  and  we  are  looking  with  a 
very  great  anxiety  to  see  how  you  enforce  your  prohibitory  law  in  New  Eng- 
land, and  to  Massachusetts  as  the  head  of  New  England.  You  are  our 
fathers  and  mothers,  and  we  look  to  you  here  for  wise  men. 

Q.     Do  they  have  a  particular  regard  for  Massachusets  ? 

A.  Of  course  we  do.  Here  is  where  our  fathers  and  mothers  were  born, 
and  we  look  here  in  this  matter  as  we  look  here  for  ideas  of  Christianity ; 
and  it  is  here  that  we  look  for  a  preponderance  of  ideas.  If  you  are  able  to 
carry  out  your  law  here,  we  think  that  we  shall  be  able  to  carry  it  out  with 
us,  so  that  there  thall  be  no  more  rum  manufactured,  and  that  the  use  of  it 
shall  be  abolished  the  same  way  as  we  have  abolished  slavery. 

Q.     Is  the  sentiment  there  pretty  strong  ? 

A.  It  is  very  earnest.  There  are  different  opinions  in  this  respect,  of 
course,  and  there  is  a  class  of  people  that  are  eternally  ready  to  halt ;  but  we 
have  societies  for  temperance,  and  there  is  quite  an  active  movement  in  the 
West. 

Q.     So  that  the  temperance  people  are  anxious  to  see  us  sustain  this  law  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Their  whole  hearts  are  awakened  about  it,  and  the  day  will 
come  when  we  will  abolish  rum,  if  you  will  sustain  your  law  here. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     How  much  whiskey  do  you  make  in  Ohio  ? 

A.  I  cannot  tell.  I  have  no  statistics  upon  that  matter.  I  am  more  par- 
ticularly acquainted  with  the  moral  bearings.  It  is  there  where  I  live. 

Q.  But  we  are  obliged  to  come  down  to  the  affairs  of  this  world  when  we 
come  to  the  business  of  legislation.  You  and  I  would  not  expect  to  promote 
morals  very  much  by  an  act  of  legislation.  Now,  is  not  whiskey  very  largely 
manufactured  in  Ohio,  and  all  down  the  Mississippi  ?  And  is  not  the  beverage 
as  common  as  the  water  in  Ohio  ? 

A.     I  should  think  not  as  common. 

Q.  Not  quite  ?  Have  you  any  idea  of  the  amount  of  grain  raised  in  Ohio 
which  is  sold  and  used  for  the  manufacture  of  whiskey  ? 

A.    I  have  not  got  the  statistics. 

Q.     Have  you  got  any  idea  of  it? 
.     A.     I  have  no  opinion  of  any  statistics  to  go  by. 

Q.     For  the  purpose  of  finding  out  what  the  quantity  used  is  ? 


768  APPENDIX. 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.    Do  you  think  that  half  of  the  corn  is  used  for  that  purpose  ? 

A.     I  have  no  "  think  "  on  that  point. 

Q.     Would  you  follow  our  example  ? 

A.'    We  follow  Massachusetts. 

Q.  Is  there  any  legal  restraint,  at  all,  in  the  Western  States,  upon  the  sale 
of  liquor  at  the  present  time,  so  far  as  you  know  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  there  is. 

Q.    Does  it  have  any  effect  upon  the  consumption  ? 

A.     Well,  the  laws  do  seem  to  have  considerable  effect. 

Q.  Is  there  any  law  that  has  existed  in  the  Western  States,  that  has  pre- 
vented people  from  drinking  if  they  wanted  it  ? 

A.     I  could  not  give  you  the  details  of  the  laws. 

Q.     We  would  like  to  compare  your  laws  with  our  own. 

A.    Well,  sir,  they  are  not  quite  up  to  your  standard. 

Q.     Are  they  not  below  our  standard  ? 

A.     They  are. 

Q.     Are  they  not  so  far  that  you  can  hardly  see  between  them  ? 

A.     I  should  think  not  quite  so  far  as  that. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  what  the  amount  of  tax  is  which  you  have  to  pay  on 
the  whiskey  that  you  send  out  of  Ohio  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  am  not  a  statistician  ;  but  I  would  respectfully  refer  you  to 
the  Commissioner  of  Internal  Revenue  at  Washington. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  habit  of  total  abstinence  is  in  any  way  so  far 
advanced  in  the  West  as  it  is  in  Massachusetts  ? 

A .     No,  sir ;  nor  Christianity. 

Q.     You  would  make  that  comparison  with  the  Eastern  States  generally  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  but  Massachusetts  is  the  head  of  the  whole  lump. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  I  want  to  know  what  the  general  belief  is  in 
Ohio,  as  to  whether  it  is  common  to  add  spirits  or  to  add  water  to  the  wines 
which  are  manufactured  there  ? 

A.  It  was  found  in  an  examination  before  a  Committee  of  the  Legislature, 
that  Mr.  Longworth,  among  others,  had  been  found  to  enforce  his  liquors. 
And  we  had  a  man  appointed  to  examine  them  all ;  and  that  regulation  has 
been  enforced  pretty  well. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DR.  EBENEZER  ALDEN. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Where  do  you  live  ? 

A.     In  Randolph. 

Q.     Are  you  a  physician  by  profession  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  many  years  have  you  been  in  practice  ? 

A.  A  good  while,  sir.  I  took  the  first  degree  in  1811  and  the  second  in 
1812. 

Q.  Will  you  state  to  the  Committee  your  views  of  the  influence  of  alcoholic 
beverages  upon  men  in  ordinary  health,  but  used  in  what  is  commonly  called 
"  moderation  ?  " 


APPENDIX.  769 

A.  I  have  come  to  this  conclusion  in  relation  to  this  subject,  that  such 
liquors  are  not  necessary  to  men  in  ordinary  health,  but  that  the  tendency  of 
the  use  of  them  is  injurious  in  many  ways,  and  especially  in  two — by  laying 
the  foundation  in  the  individual  of  an  intemperate  appetite,  and  secondly  by 
their  example  upon  other  people. 

Q.  We  have  had  much  said  of  the  dietetical  value  of  especially  the  lighter 
beverages.  Have  you  any  opinion  in  regard  to  that  ? 

A.  I  have  this  general  opinion  upon  that  subject,  that  although  I  should 
not  undertake  to  place  myself  in  opposition  to  the  young  men  in  relation  to 
chemistry,  I  would  not  say,  in  respect  to  alcoholic  liquors,  no  nutriment  could 
possibly  be  extracted  from  any  of  them — I  would  not  say  that — but  I  say  this, 
that  if  the  doctrine  that  alcoholic  liquors  are  food  is  chemically  right,  it  is 
practically  wrong;  that  the  influence  of  such  an  opinion,  authoritatively 
expressed,  would,  in  its  effect  upon  the  community,  be  injurious.  That  is  the 
general  impression  I  have  in  relation  to  that  matter. 

Q.  Are  you  able  to  believe  that  the  alcohol  of  the  beverages  has  this 
nutritive  power  or  quality  in  any  valuable  measure  ? 

A.  That  point  is  a  disputed  point.  When  you  come  to  that  particular 
point  it  is  one  disputed  by  many  chemists.  My  own  impression  is,  that  as 
alcohol,  there  is  very  little  nutriment,  and  so  mixed  up  with  other  matters 
that  the  nutriment,  if  any,  in  it,  is  not  the  particular  reason  why  people  use  it 
I  hold,  in  the  first  place,  that  alcohol  is  alcohol  everywhere ;  and,  in  the 
the  second  place,  I  hold  that  the  use  of  alcohol  is  injurious  to  a  man  in  health, 
in  the  ways  in  which  I  state  it.  My  main  point  is  this :  the  reason  I  object  to 
the  use  of  alcohol  and  alcoholic  liquors,  is  on  account  of  their  general  ten- 
dency. I  believe  their  general  tendency  to  be  evil,  and  I  believe  that  the  use 
of  alcohol  as  a  beverage  in  any  way,  however  temperately  used,  leads  to  an 
intemperate  use,  and  that  therefore  every  man,  in  the  first  place,  should 
abstain  from  the  use  of  those  liquors  on  his  own  account,  and  I  believe  he 
should  do  it  on  account  of  his  neighbors.  That  brings  me  to  the  point  before 
us — whether  the  sale  of  alcoholic  liquors  should  be  licensed  by  the  State,  and 
my  opinion  upon  that  subject  is,  that  the  public  safety  requires  that  the  sale 
of  such  liquors  should  not  be  licensed,  and  especially  that  the  sale  should  not 
be  licensed,  for  the  purppse  of  beverages,  in  public  houses  and  in  groceries. 
They  should  be  especially  excluded  from  those  places ;  and  if  any  one  asks 
me  my  objection  to  granting  licenses  to  public  houses,  I  have  only  to  lift  my 
spectacles  and  you  see  that  I  have  one  eye  not  in  very  good  condition. 

Q.     Will  you  explain  yourself  in  regard  to  that  ? 

A.  I  was  thrown  over  in  a  stage  by  a  man  who  had  been  long  driving  the 
stage  ;  but  he  undertook  to  drive  too  rapidly  once,  and  the  occasion  of  his 
rapid  driving,  as  I  always  supposed,  was  that  he  had  too  much  liquor  in  his 
head.  I  lost  my  eye  by  the  accident.  That  is  one  reason  why  I  think  liquor 
ought  not  to  be  freely  sold.  It  ought  to  be  excluded  from  public  houses.  If 
it  is  sold  in  these  public  houses  the  sale  is  made  respectable.  I  think  if  it  is 
sold  at  all  it  should  be  for  legitimate  purposes,  as  in  medicine  and  in  the  arts. 
In  regard  to  the  use  of  alcohol  and  alcoholic  preparations  medicinally,  I  well 
remember  the  advice  that  was  given  to  me,  as  a  pupil,  many  years  ago,  by 
97 


770  APPENDIX. 

Dr.  Rush,  of  Philadelphia,  and  have  endeavored  to  follow  that  advice  in  my 
practice. 

Q.     Will  you  state  in  substance  Dr.  Rush's  advice  ? 

A.  Dr.  Rush  was  lecturing  in  the  session  of  1811-12,  on  the  subject  of 
chronic  diseases,  and  the  diseases  of  the  digestive  organs  in  particular.  Dr. 
Rush  said  that  the  custom  had  been  in  such  diseases  to  use  to  a  great  extent 
tinctures,  bitters,  &c.  He  said  that  he  had  seen  very  ill  effects  from  the  use 
of  tinctures,  some  of  which  had  occurred  in  his  own  practice.  He  said,  "  Gen- 
tlemen, I  have  a  remark  that  I  wish  to  make  upon  this  subject,  and  in  order 
that  you  may  always  remember  it,  I  will  rise  and  request  you  to  rise  also." 
Then  in  the  most  solemn  manner,  and  in  the  most  eloquent  manner,  (for  he 
was  a  very  eloquent  speaker,)  he  said,  "  Gentlemen,  I  charge  you  as  young 
men  that  are  to  have  the  care  of  sick  persons,  not  to  use  tinctures  in  your 
practice  in  chronic  diseases,  if  you  can  avoid  it.  I  have  decided  not  to  do  so 
in  my  own  practice  hereafter,  for  I  have  determined  (the  Lord  helping  me) 
that  in  the  future  no  man  shall  be  able  to  rise  up  in  the  judgment  day,  and 
say  that  Benjamin  Rush  made  him  a  drunkard." 

I  desire  here  to  refer  to  some  resolutions  that  express  my  own  opinions  in 
this  matter.  At  the  time  they  were  passed  I  was  a  member  of  the  medical 
society,  and  these  are  the  resolutions  of  the  Massachusetts  Medical  Society, 
and  are  connected  with  this  very  subject — the  use  of  liquors  medicinally,  and 
their  influence  when  thus  used  upon  the  community.  These  resolutions  were 
passed  because  it  was  thought  at  that  time  that  the  use  of  alcohol  and  alco- 
holic preparations  as  medicine,  had  a  deleterious  effect  upon  the  people.  I 
will  not  read  the  whole  of  the  resolutions  unless  desired,  but  will  state  the 
point  very  briefly.  The  resolutions  were  offered  by  Dr.  Warren,  the  late 
John  C.  Warren,  and  passed  with  great  unanimity.  They  are  substantially 
this : — 

"  WHEREAS,  There  is  reason  to  believe  that  the  habitual  and  temporary 
use  of  ardent  spirits  is  often  the  consequence  of  an  opinion  that  such  liquids 
contribute  to  the  health  of  man  ;  and  Whereas,  It  seems  to  be  a  duty  pecu- 
liarly belonging  to  this  Society  to  oppose  and  correct  so  insidious  an  error, 
therefore, 

"  1.  Resolved,  That  in  the  opinion  of  this  Society  the  constant  use  of  ardent 
spirits  is  riot  the  source  of  strength  and  vigor,  but  that  it  is  generally 
productive  of  weakness  and  disease. 

"  2.  Resolved,  That  this  Society  agree  to  discourage  the  use  of  ardent 
spirits  as  much  as  lies  in  its  power,  and  for  these  purposes  discontinue  the 
employment  of  spirituous  preparations  medicinally  whenever  they  can  find 
substitutes,  and  when  compelled  to  use  them  for  any  great  length  of  time,  will 
warn  the  patient  against  forming  unconquerable  and  fatal  habits. 

"  3.  Resolved,  That  the  excessive  and  constant  use  of  wine  is,  in  the  opin- 
ion of  this  Society,  the  cause  of  many  diseases,  and  that  although  it  is  useful 
in  some  of  them,  as  in  stages  of  weakness  in  fever,  its  use  in  these  cases  is 
often  carried  too  far  and  continued  too  long. 

"  4.  Resolved,  That  in  the  opinion  of  this  Society  the  most  salutary  drink 
for  the  general  use  of  men  is  water,  and  that  even  this  pure  liquid  must  be 
employed  in  a  rational  and  discreet  manner,  and  especially  in  hot  weather, 
and  that  if  we  were  called  upon  to  recommend  some  drink  of  a  more  stimu- 
lating character,  we  should  advise  the  use  of  malt  liquors. 

"  5.  Resolved,  That  this  Society  use  its  endeavors  to  ascertain  the  best 
mode  of  removing  the  evil  of  intemperance,  and  for  that  purpose  a  premium 
of  fifty  dollars  shall  be  offered  for  an  essay  upon  that  subject." 


APPENDIX.  771 

All  these  resolutions  were  passed  without  a  single  dissenting  voice,  with  the 
exception  of  the  fourth,  concerning  malt  liquors.  Respecting  that,  some  of  us 
did  not  quite  approve  it,  and  thought  it  had  better  be  left  out.  The  disserta- 
tion referred  to  in  the  last  resolution  was  brought  forward  and  read  in  the 
Society  two  years  afterwards,  and  I  will  leave  a  copy  of  it  in  the  hands  of 
the  Committee,  to  do  with  it  as  they  desire. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     What  year  was  this  ? 

A.  In  1827.  The  dissertation  goes  on  to  show  the  ill-effects  of  distilled 
liquors  as  beverages. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  Do  you  regard  indigestion  as  a  direct  result  of  the 
constant  or  continuous  use  of  even  moderate  doses  of  alcoholic  beverages  ? 

A.  It  is  a  very  frequent  result.  The  operation  of  ardent  spirits,  like 
other  medicines,  is  very  different  under  different  circumstances. 

Q.  In  regard  to  your  interpretation  of  the  phrase  "  excessive  and  constant 
use  of  wine,"  would  you  apply  the  word  "  excessive  "  to  a  frequency  that  leads 
to  inebriety,  or  merely  to  the  continuous  use  of  smaller  doses  ? 

A.  It  must  be  confessed  that  in  1827  some  of  us  had  not  our  eyes  opened 
upon  this  subject.  I  confess  that  mine  were  not  opened.  I  considered,  at 
that  time,  that  there  was  a  question  about  what  was  meant  by  excessive  use. 
It  was  not  familiarly  known  in  the  community  then  that  alcohol  was  alcohol 
in  every  case.  It  was  not  known  that  alcohol  in  distilled  liquors  was  precisely 
the  same  thing  as  alcohol  wherever  you  find  it ;  that  by  certain  re-agents 
alcohol  can  be  obtained  from  wine  without  distillation.  I  was  brought  up 
under  old  Dr.  Dexter,  the  chemist.  My  first  course  of  lectures  was  at  Har- 
vard College.  He  did  not  go  into  that  subject,  neither  did  the  gentleman  I 
was  with  afterwards. 

Q.  That  does  not  answer  my  question  touching  the  word  "  excessive." 
There  is  a  continuous  implication  here,  if  not  a  direct  assertion,  that  the  steady, 
continuous,  moderate  use,  within  the  limits  of  sobriety  (without  rising  to 
inebriety),  of  lighter  liquids,  such  as  wine,  especially,  is  useful.  You  speak 
of  the  constant  and  "  excessive  "  prescription  of  it  in  diseases.  Do  you  apply 
the  word  "  excessive  "  to  the  use  which  leads  to  inebriety  ? 

A.  You  must  take  that  word  in  connection  with  the  temptations  and  with 
the  results  and  with  the  circumstances  and  with  the  views  entertained  at  that 
time.  My  views  now  are  somewhat  modified  from  what  they  were  at  that 
time.  I  now  think  that  any  use  of  alcohol  as  a  beverage  is  an  excessive  use, 
and  a  wrong  done  by  man  to  man  ;  that  his  own  personal  safety  requires  that 
he  should  let  alone  all  alcoholic  liquors,  upon  the  ground  of  his  personal 
safety,  lest  he  should  himself  fall  into  the  habit  of  intemperance.  From  all 
the  observations  I  have  made,  I  find  that  of  all  persons  who  use  alcoholic 
liquors  as  a  beverage,  a  certain  percentage  become  intemperate,  and  many  of 
them  die  drunkards.  I  had  occasion  to  look  into  this  subject  as  long  ago  as 
when  these  resolutions  were  passed.  I  was  invited  to  give  a  temperance  lec- 
ture about  that  time,  the  first  ever  given  in  the  place,  and  I  wanted  some  facts. 
I  looked  to  see  who  were  posted  up  as  drunkards.  I  was  perfectly  astonished 
to  find  that  one  out  of  every  twenty-five  of  the  legal  voters  of  the  town  in 
which  I  lived  were  posted  as  drunkards. 

Q.    In  what  year  was  that  ? 


772  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  should  think  the  last  posting  of  drunkards  was  in  1823.  I  looked  at 
the  list  in  1826.  I  stated  that  fact  at  the  lecture.  I  also  stated  the  fact  after- 
wards in  the  town  of  East  Bridgewater,  and  a  doctor  who  heard  me  make  the 
statement,  assured  me  it  was  not  so  in  that  town,  and  thought  that  the  people 
where  I  lived  must  be  very  drunken  indeed,  if  so  large  a  proportion  were 
posted  as  one  in  twenty-five.  I  asked  him  if  he  knew  pretty  well  all  the  peo- 
ple in  the  town.  He  said  that  he  did.  I  asked  him  if  he  would  be  kind 
enough  to  make  me  out  a  little  list  of  the  drunkards.  He  did  so,  and  I  kept 
the  count,  knowing  the  number  of  legal  voters  there,  until  I  said,  "  Please 
stop,  Doctor,  you  are  beyond  me."  He  said  that  he  had  no  idea  the  propor- 
tion was  so  large.  I  stated  the  same  fact  publicly  in  the  town  of  Franklin,  in 
the  presence  of  Dr.  Emmons,  and  he  afterwards  made  the  same  remark  to 
me, — that  we  must  have  a  very  drunken  population  in  the  town  where  I  lived, 
and  assuring  me  that  such  was  not  the  fact  in  the  town  of  Franklin.  Another 
physician  in  the  place  was  sitting  by,  and  afterwards  said  that  he  did  not  wish 
to  dispute  with  Dr.  Emmons,  but  assured  me  that  he  was  well  acquainted 
with  the  town,  and  assured  me  that  my  statement  would  apply  to  Franklin  as 
well,  and  he  gave  me  the  figures,  and  they  were  just  about  the  same.  I  have 
reason  to  think,  therefore,  that  of  those  who  use  liquor  as  a  beverage  and 
habitually,  a  certain  ratio  become  drunkards ;  and  I  think  that  every  Chris- 
tian man,  especially,  ought  not  only  to  abstain  himself,  but  by  his  example 
and  influence  endeavor  to  prevent  others  from  using  it.  That  is  my  idea* 
Ever  since  I  voted  for  those  resolutions,  I  have  endeavored  to  act  in  accord- 
ance with  them,  and  my  experience  in  the  use  of  liquor,  medicinally,  is  sub- 
stantially that  of  Dr.  Sabin,  who  has  testified,  only  I  would  not  undertake  to 
say  that  I  think  myself  very  much  more  successful  than  other  people.  I  do 
not  know  about  that — others  must  be  the  judge.  I  am  satisfied  that  there  is  a 
great  deal  too  much  liquor  used  as  medicine ;  that  the  medical  use  is  doing  an 
immense  mischief  by  creating  an  intemperate  appetite.  That  was  the  opinion 
of  Dr.  Rush,  and  my  own  experience  corroborates  it.  I  think  we  ought  to 
avoid  it  whenever  we  can  find  substitutes.  I  claim  a  right  to  use  any  medi- 
cine that  will  save  my  patient,  however  dangerous  it  may  be  ;  but  at  the  same 
time,  if  I  must  use  dangerous  medicine,  I  must  use  as  little  as  possible,  and 
must  give  my  patient  notice  that  he  must  be  very  careful  that  it  does  not  lead 
him  astray. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  McCLELLAN.)  You  would  use  arsenic  in  that  way,  I 
suppose  ? 

A .  Certainly,  I  should  use  arsenic  if  I  found  it  necessary,  but  I  do  not 
believe  if  I  put  a  teaspoonful  of  flour  into  a  pound  of  arsenic,  and  then  some- 
body takes  it  up  and  extracts  a  certain  portion  of  nutriment  from  it,  that  it 
would  be  proper  therefore  to  label  it  "  nutriment."  I  should  rather  let  the  old 
name  remain. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  We  hear  much  of  the  prescription  of  whiskey  for 
pulmonary  diseases.  I  desire  to  ask  whether  the  valuable  property  of  such 
prescriptions  is  commonly  supposed  to  be  the  fusel  oil  that  whiskey  contains  ? 

A.    You  must  ask  the  chemist  about  that. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  The  resolutions  you  have  just  now  read  were 
passed  forty  years  ago,  were  they  not  ? 


APPENDIX.  773 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  the  statistics  and  facts  you  gave  in  regard  to  the  state  of  temper- 
ance in  your  neighborhood  relate  to  a  period  of  time  now  between  forty  and 
forty-five  years  ago  ? 

A.     They  were  to  about  the  years  from  1823  to  1830. 

Q.     Does  that  state  of  things  continue  to  this  day  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  that  state  of  things  does  not  continue.  After  this  effort  in 
1826  the  whole  community,  as  you  are  well  aware,  were  aroused  upon  the  sub- 
ject of  temperance,  and  a  great  effort  was  made.  We  had  a  license  law  in 
operation  at  that  time,  licenses  were  given  to  retailers  and  to  tavern-keepers, 
and  the  amount  of  liquor  sold  was  so  great,  and  its  influence  was  so  bad,  that 
we  felt  we  were  liable,  as  some  of  our  English  friends  expressed  it,  of  becom- 
ing a  nation  of  drunkards.  The  agitation  of  the  temperance  reform  was  then 
Commenced,  and  men  who  feared  that  result,  men  who  wished  for  the  public 
good,  were  united  in  the  use  of  moral  suasion  and  in  endeavors  to  persuade 
all  men  that  liquors  were  not  needed  for  well  men,  that  they  were  not  adapted 
to  their  use,  and  that  they  had  better  let  them  alone.  A  great  deal  was  accom- 
plished at  that  time.  We  got  up  temperance  societies.  We  obtained  the 
names  of  large  numbers  to  the  pledge,  the  names  of  males,  females  and 
children.  We  put  them  all  in  and  endeavored  to  get  them  in  our  Sabbath 
schools  if  we  possibly  could.  At  that  time  we  had  in  a  population  of  about 
twenty-two  hundred,  eleven  retailers  and  three  tavern-keepers,  and  one  of 
those  eleven  retailers  who,  perhaps,  sold  a  little  more  than  the  average,  told 
me  afterwards  that  he  sold  in  one  year  about  that  time  twenty-one  hundred 
gallons  of  liquor.  So  you  may  judge  something  of  the  difficulties  we  had  to 
contend  with.  But  we  went  through  successfully  to  a  certain  extent.  Two 
of  those  retailers  could  not  be  persuaded  to  leave  the  business.  One  of  them 
sold  liquor  to  an  intemperate  man  whose  wife  was  a  patient  of  mine.  She 
became  sick,  was  confined,  and  that  retailer  sold  liquor  to  her  husband,  know- 
ing his  character  and  the  situation  of  his  family,  and  he  got  drunk,  came  home 
in  a  cold  easterly  storm  and  got  into  bed  with  his  wife  and  little  child,  and 
the  consequence  was  a  severe  fever.  I  said  to  myself,  there  must  be  something 
more  done ;  we  must  stop  the  business.  Other  friends  of  temperance  united 
with  me.  We  tried  for  two  years  before  we  succeeded.  We  employed  coun- 
sel ;  we  went  before  the  County  Commissioners  and  gave  our  testimony  against 
the  dealers,  and  they  refused  in  consequence  to  grant  licenses,  and  we  have 
never  had  a  retail  license  granted  in  that  town  since.  I  want  a  prohibitory 
law  continued  now  to  protect  the  people  where  it  is  impossible  to  exercise  a 
proper  influence  upon  the  dealers  by  moral  suasion.  I  want  to  be  protected 
in  my  rights,  and  I  want  to  see  others  protected,  and  the  dealers  kept  from 
injuring  the  community. 

Q.  You  state  that  between  forty  and  fifty  years  ago,  there  was  one  for 
every  twenty-five  who  was  posted  as  a  drunkard  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Does  that  state  of  things  continue  to  the  present  time  ? 

A.  I  have  no  statistics  now,  but  I  am  very  sure  there  is  no  such  thing.  If 
you  exclude  the  Catholic  population  it  certainly  does  not  exist.  I  do  not 
believe  it  exists,  now  as  then,  but  I  cannot  give  you  statistics. 


774  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Have  you  any  doubt  that  there  has  been  a  very  great  progress  made  in 
the  direction  of  sobriety  in  your  town,  and  everywhere  else  in  the  Common- 
wealth during  the  last  fifty  years  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  have  not  the  least  doubt.  I  know  there  has  been  great 
progress  made.  I  know  that  intemperance  was  exceedingly  rife  during  the 
early  years  of  ray  recollection.  "When  the  "not-drink-too-much-societies" 
were  organized  in  1812,  they  tried  to  do  what  they  could  to  suppress  intem- 
perance, but  they  succeeded  only  partially.  They  did  a  little,  but  the  tem- 
perance cause  was  not  really  successful  until  we  signed  a  pledge  for  our  own 
sake  and  for  the  sake  of  others,  to  drink  nothing  that  could  intoxicate. 

Q.  For  the  last  half  century,  there  has  been  a  great,  marked  and  almost 
continual  progress  made,  has  there  not  ? 

A .    It  has  not  always  been  exactly  uniform. 

Q.     I  do  not  mean  uniform,  but  it  has  been  continuous,  has  it  not  ? 

A.     There  has  been  progress  just  as  far  as  by  public  suasion 

Q.  I  want  to  get  at  the  fact,  whether  your  opinion  is  either  one  way  or  the 
Other,  whether  you  think  or  do  not  think  that  there  has  been  a  general,  con- 
tinuous progress  for  the  last  half  a  century  in  the  direction  of  sobriety  ? 

A.     I  think  there  has  been  progress. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  the  same  fact  is  true  of  New  England  as  well  as 
of  Massachusetts  ? 

A.  I  have  not  so  good  an  opportunity  to  judge.  I  have  lived  several  years 
of  that  period  in  New  Hampshire,  and  am  pretty  well  conversant  with  the 
state  of  things  there. 

Q.  Do  not  your  reading  as  well  as  your  personal  observation  assert  the 
fact,  that  this  is  true  also  of  the  civilized  world  ?  Is  it  not  true  of  other  parts 
of  this  country,  and  also  true  of  the  British  Islands  ? 

A.     I  had  rather  confine  myself  to  facts  that  I  am  acquainted  with. 

Q.     Then  your  studies  have  not  included  that  branch  of  the  subject  ? 

A.  My  studies  have  included  my  professional  and  personal  observation 
inainly. 

Q.  Fifty  years  ago  there  was  a  considerably  different  state  of  things  in 
society  in  respect  to  soberness  and  drunkenness,  from  the  state  of  things  that 
now  exist — that  is  true,  is  it  not  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  I  think  so. 

Q.  Has  there  not  been  a  considerable  change  in  the  form  of  diseases,  or  of 
many  diseases  during  that  time  ?  Do  not  doctors  very  commonly  remark  of 
such  and  such  diseases,  that  they  have  to  be  treated  very  differently  now  in  a 
majority  of  cases  from  the  way  they  had  to  be  treated  years  ago  ? 

A.  I  believe  there  is  a  change  in  the  type  of  diseases  in  different  periods. 
There  was  a  great  difference  in  my  opinion  between  the  years  1806  and  1816 
and  the  ten  years  that  followed  after.  The  diseases  were  more  inflamatory 
during  the  first  part  of  that  period,  from  1809  (of  which  I  can  speak  very 
distinctly  from  my  own  knowledge),  and  the  spotted  fever  was  prevailing  then. 
In  the  first  part  of  that  epidemic,  it  was  needed  to  use  spirits,  as  we  thought, 
very  extensively,  but  in  the  course  of  a  few  years  there  was  a  change.  When 
I  returned  to  Massachusetts  a  few  years  after,  I  found  that  the  opinions  of 
physicians  were  very  different  from  what  they  were  at  '.hat  time. 


APPENDIX.  775 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  the  medical  judgment  of  the  best  writers  now 
is  that,  in  the  old  world  as  well  as  in  this  country,  it  is  now  necessary  to 
stimulate  very  much  more  than  it  used  to  be  fifty  or  a  hundred  years  ago, 
when  a  majority  of  all  the  patients  were  already  suffering  more  or  less  from 
over-stimulation  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  physicians  of  the  old  country  have  always  recom- 
nended  more  stimulants  than  seemed  to  me  necessary  or  proper. 

Q.  That  is  not  quite  an  answer  to  my  question.  I  ask  you  whether  expe- 
rience has  not  proved  that  during  later  times  —  during  the  present 
generation — it  is  necessary  in  the  treatment  of  diseases  to  stimulate  much 
more  than  it  was  considered  necessary,  fifty  or  a  hundred  years  ago,  when  the 
patients  were  so  commonly  already  suffering  under  over-stimulation,  when 
they  came  under  the  doctors'  hands  ?  In  modern  times,  patients  come  under 
the  doctors'  treatment,  not  suffering  from  over-stimulation,  but  needing  stimu- 
lation. In  those  times,  they  were  already  over-stimulated,  and  they  suffered 
in  consequence  of  it.  Is  not  that  a  fact  as  recorded  and  declared  by  leading 
medical  authorities,  both  abroad  and  at  home  ? 

A.  I  had  rather  give  my  impressions  than  the  opinions  of  other  men,  if  it 
is  equally  agreeable  to  you. 

Q.  You  have  been  giving  your  own,  but  I  want  now  to  see  what  is  your 
knowledge  of  existing  medical  authority. 

A.  My  reading  would  lead  me  to  suppose  that  there  is  a  difference 
of  opinion  upon  that  subject.  I  think  that  stimulating  medicines  are  used  at 
this  time  to  a  far  greater  extent  than  they  should  be. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  Dr.  Carpenter  supports  the  use  of  mild  alco- 
holic drinks  as  a  part  of  the  diet  of  feeble  persons  not  yet  diseased? 

A.  If  I  was  aware  of  it,  or  if  it  is  a  fact,  that  would  not  alter  my  opinion. 
My  opinion  is,  that  such  use  is  injurious. 

Q.     I  want  to  see  how  far  your  opinion  corresponds  with  other  authorities. 

A.  My  opinion  is,  as  I  stated  in  the  beginning,  that  as  a  beverage,  alcoholic 
stimulants  ought  not  to  be  used  at  all  as  medicine.  They  ought  to  be  used 
with  great  care,  and  only  in  such  quantities  and  for  such  a  length  of  time  as 
is  necessary  in  the  judgment  of  a  judicious  physician.  I  should  like  to  add 
one  other  point, — that  the  community,  at  this  moment,  is  suffering  most 
intensely  from  allowing  certain  articles  to  be  put  into  the  apothecaries'  shops, 
and  sold  and  used  as  tonics,  the  use  of  which  is  mainly  to  promote  intemper- 
ance. That  is  their  undoubted  effect.  And  having  seen  a  great  deal  of  the 
use  of  preparations  of  that  sort,  it  has  led  me  to  believe  that  the  use  of  dis- 
tilled spirits,  in  any  form,  to  any  great  extent,  is  not  needful  for  persons  in 
ordinary  health,  or  to  persons  not  under  the  care  of  a  physician ;  and  when 
the  time  comes  that  a  person  requires  any  alcoholic  liquor  as  a  beverage  it 
should  be  administered  under  the  direction  and  particular  care  of  a  regularly 
acknowledged  physician,  and  that  he  should  never  be  his  own  physician  in 
such  use. 

Q.  I  am  endeavoring  to  find  out  what  should  be  done  by  persons  who  need 
medical  advice,  and  what  rules  should  govern  the  physician  in  administering 
such  stimulants. 

A.    His  own  judgment. 


776  APPENDIX. 

Q.  I  began  with  you  upon  the  bases  of  the  medical  resolutions  passed  forty 
or  fifty  years  ago.  In  your  remarks  just  now,  yon  condemn  the  use  of  all 
alcoholic  stimulants,  unless  administered  under  the  direction  of  a  physician. 
You  consider  those  stimulants  injurious  in  themselves,  and  as  having  a  great 
tendency  to  make  men  drunkards,  although  taken  under  those  modified 
circumstances,  and  in  great  moderation  ? 

A.  So  much  so  that  I  feel  it  my  duty  to  caution  my  patients  when  admin- 
istering them. 

Q.  Now  are  you  not  aware  that  Dr.  James  Jackson,  who  was  the  Nestor 
of  your  profession  until  he  retired  from  it  recently,  in  a  letter  to  a  young  phy- 
sician a  few  years  ago,  testified  that,  after  forty  years'  experience,  during 
which  he  had  been  in  the  habit  of  administering  these  stimulants  to  people 
of  all  ages,  from  children  in  the  age  of  dentition  up  to  extreme  old  age,  he 
had  never,  save  in  one  instance,  seen  a  patient  (and  he  had  carefully  observed 
in  order  to  know)  brought  into  dangerous  habits  in  respect  to  drink,  and  in 
that  one  instance  the  patient  was  a  lady  ? — that  the  occurrence  happened 
twenty  years  before  he  wrote  the  book,  that  he  warned  her  of  the  danger  and 
that  she  avoided  it  and  proceeded  no  further?  Are  you  not  aware  that  this 
was  the  testimony  of  that  venerable  man,  from  careful  observations,  during  an 
extended  practice  of  forty  years  ? 

A.  I  am  aware  of  it,  and  I  am  aware  that  physicians  may  differ  upon 
that  subject,  although  I  claim  Dr.  Jackson  as  a  personal  friend  and  one  whom 
I  highly  esteem.  I  once  had  occasion  to  speak  in  relation  to  that  subject 
before  the  society,  and  on  one  occasion  when  I  said  some  things  that  were 
not  exactly  agreeable  to  him  in  relation  to  that  topic,  he  spoke  a  little  harshly 
to  me,  but  afterwards  came  to  me  when  the  meeting  was  adjourned  and  said, 
"  Doctor,  I  want  you  to  go  and  dine  with  me.  I  respect  you,  I  believe  you 
are  an  honest  man  and  desirous  of  promoting  the  interests  of  the  profession." 
The  subject  under  consideration  had  some  relation  to  excluding  wine  from 
our  public  table.  Dr.  Jackson  is  a  most  excellent  man,  I  respect  him  highly, 
but  I  think  he  is  not  correct  in  this  matter. 

Q.  We  have  reached  a  class  of  questions  concerning  which  the  observa- 
tions and  the  experience  as  well  as  the  theories  of  the  most  practical  and 
highest  scientific  minds  in  the  world  to  some  extent  differ.  Is  not  that  so  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir.     But  I  do  not  see  that  that  has  any  relations  to  a  license  law. 

Q.  On  that  difference  do  you  think  that  the  General  Court  can  base 
legislation  by  taking  sides  one  way  or  the  other,  either  with  you  upon  the  one 
hand  or  Dr.  Jackson  upon  the  other  ?  Must  not  the  General  Court  rather 
base  its  legislation  upon  the  principles  which  leave  open  to  the  scientific  and 
practical  medical  mind  those  still  further  opportunities  to  work  out  those 
more  exact  and  better  ascertained  conclusions  ? 

A.  I  do  not  consider  that  the  legislation  has  any  relation  to  the  medical 
question  involved  in  this  discussion.  I  do  not  consider  it  so.  I  ask  that  the 
selling  of  liquors  may  be  prohibited,  not  as  alcohol,  not  as  medicine ;  but 
that  the  common  sale  and  use  of  liquor  may  be  prevented. 

Q.  Then  what  you  desire  to  have  broken  up  is  the  tippling  shop,  the 
drinking  saloon  and  the  dram  bar  ? 

A.     And  all  other  places  where  it  is  sold,  especially  in  public  houses. 


APPENDIX.  777 

Q.    You  want  the  dram  bars  broken  up  ? 

A.     I  want  to  have  the  prohibitory  law  executed  ;  that  is  all. 

Q.  That  is  so  general  a  phrase  that  it  means  nothing.  You  do  not  expect 
to  drive  alcoholic  stimulants  or  alcoholic  stimulation  out  of  human  society, 
because  just  now  you  have  made  special  reservation  for  medication. 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.  Therefore  you  do  not  expect  nor  want  to  drive  it  out,  neither  do  you 
want  to  exclude  it  from  the  manufactures  or  arts  ? 

A.     I  have  nothing  at  all  to  do  with  that. 

Q.  But  what  you  do  want,  as  I  suppose,  is  to  break  up  the  tippling  shops 
and  the  places  where  drams  are  sold  ? 

A.  I  want  to  make  the  sale  of  liquor  anything  but  respectable.  I  do  not 
want  it  sold  in  any  public  places  where  my  children  or  my  neighbors'  children 
shall  be  led  astray  by  its  sale. 

Q.  Supposing  the  Legislature  should  pass  a  resolve  that  the  sale  of  alco- 
holic liquors  is  not  respectable,  would  that  make  it  any  the  less  respectable  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Suppose  they  should  say  it  was  not  respectable  for  a  man  to  wear  a 
brown  coat,  that  would  not  make  it  so.  The  respectability  of  a  thing  must 
depend  upon  its  internal  character,  must  it  not  ? 

A.  The  tendency  of  the  thing  is  decisive  of  its  character,  and  that  is  the 
reason  why  I  want  to  abolish  the  sale  of  liquor. 

Q.     But  you  do  not  want  to  abolish  the  thing  itself  ? 

A.  I  want  to  abolish  it  as  an  article  to  be  used  as  a  beverage.  I  want  to 
abolish  it  as  far  as  I  can  by  my  persuasion,  and  then  I  want  to  abolish  it  where 
I  cannot  reach  persons  by  persuasion,  by  law,  and  abolish  the  article  so  com- 
pletely that  it  cannot  be  obtained  without  great  difficulty.  I  would  make  the 
sale  of  liquor  disreputable. 

Q.  Then  as  I  understand  you,  what  you  desire  is,  to  make  it  extremely 
difficult  for  people  to  get  liquor  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  because  there  are  so  many  intemperate  people  that  will  get  it 
if  they  can,  I  want  to  make  it  difficult  for  them  to  get  it. 

Q.     Do  you  want  to  make  it  difficult  for  people  to  get  it  for  proper  uses  ? 

A .  I  would  make  it  difficult  for  them  to  get  it  for  any  but  medical  use.  I 
want  to  make  it  so  that  people  can  obtain  a  better  article  for  medical  purposes 
than  they  now  can. 

Q.  Do  you  want  to  make  it  difficult  for  the  manufacturers  and  artisans  of 
this  country  to  get  the  fifty  million  gallons  that  they  use  annually  ? 

A.  I  do  not  have  anything  to  do  with  that  subject.  I  leave  that  entirely 
with  the  legislature. 

Q.  Then  you  do  not  want  to  prevent  them  from  getting  any,  but  you  want 
to  prevent  them  from  making  an  improper  use  of  it  after  it  is  got. 

A.  I  am  not  aware  that  such  articles  are  used  in  the  arts  to  such  an 
extent. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  looked  over  the  returns  of  the  town  agents  to  our  Sta^te 
Liquor  Commissioner,  and  seen  the  proportion  of  Medford  rum  and  whiskey, 
and  such  like  articles,  which  are  sold  for  medical  and  mechanical  purposes 
and  for  the  arts  ? 

98 


778  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  suppose  they  are  made  into  alcohol  before  they  are  used  in  the  arts. 
My  impression  is  that  it  was  alcohol  that  they  desired  to  use  in  the  arts. 

Q.     Do  you  suppose  that  you  ever  saw   any  pure  alcohol  in  your  life  ? 

A.     I  have  seen  alcohol  that  went  by  that  name. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  one  apothecary  in  ten,  in  the  city  of  Boston,  ever 
saw  any  ? 

A.  I  should  not  undertade  to  speak  of  the  experience  of  other  men.  I 
hope  some  of  them  have  seen  it. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  people  engaged  in  mechanism,  and  the  arts,  to  any 
great  extent,  use  pure  alcohol  V  Dp  you  suppose  that  pure  alcohol  is  being 
used  by  them  ? 

A.  In  respect  to  that  point,  I  stated  in  the  beginning  that  I  did  not  attend 
specially  to  chemistry. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  I  would  like  to  ask  a  single  question  touching  the 
period  of  which  you  make  mention,  when  one  man  in  every  twenty-five  voters 
was  posted  as  a  drunkard,  whether  or  not  there  was  a  large  number  of  other 
men  who  now-a-days  would  be  termed  moderate  drinkers  ? 

A.  I  stated  at  the  time  when  the  calculation  was  made,  (and  as  the  state- 
ment was  not  corrected  I  supposed  that  I  was  right  in  making  it,)  that  on  five 
roads  leading  from  the  town,  I  supposed  there  were  just  about  as  many  ready 
to  take  the  place  of  the  drunkards  as  soon  as  they  were  left  off  the  list. 

Q,  So  that  the  list  of  posted  drunkards  did  not  really  include  all  immod- 
erate drinkers  ? 

A.  It  only  included  those  that  were  posted.  Those  were  the  persons  whom 
the  selectmen  were  required,  on  account  of  the  injury  they  were  doing  to 
themselves  and  to  their  fainiles,  to  post  up  in  the  retailers'  shops  and  forbid 
retailers  selling  to  them. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  Are  you  not  perfectly  well  aware  that  in  tho 
United  States  Pharmacopoeia,  our  most  eminent  and  standard  work,  the  most 
eminent  men,  after  detailing  the  medicinal  effects  of  alcohol,  especially  caution 
physicians  and  all  others  from  using  it  as  a  beverage,  saying  that  its  use  is 
attended  with  the  most  deplorable  consequences  ? 

A.  I  recollect  a  very  distinct  statement  in  the  United  States  Dispensatory 
in  that  respect,  and  suppose  that  similar  statements  arc  made  in  other  medical 
authorities. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DR.  JOSIAII  BARTLETT. 

v3.     (By  Mr.  MIXER.)     For  how  long  a  time  have  you  been  a  medical 
practitioner  ? 
"  A.     In  one  place  for  forty-seven  years. 

Q.  What  is  your  judgment  of  the  desirableness  of  continuing  the  practice 
of  moderate  drinking  V 

A.  In  the  early  part  of  my  practice  my  attention  was  called  to  the  effects 
of  intemperance.  I  saw  more  suffering,  more  sorrow,  more  wretchedness, 
more  woe,  more  disease  coming  from  that  source  than  from  any  other,  or  from 
all  others  combined.  I  say  this  because  I  believe  it  to  be  perfectly  true. 
From  the  year  1820  to  1836  liquor  was  sold  as  free  as  water  to  all  comers.  In 
the  little  town  of  Concord,  with  a  population  of  less  than  twenty-one  hundred, 


APPENDIX.  779 

liquor  was  sold  in  thirteen  different  places,  and  the  requirement  then  was  that 
liquor  should  not  be  sold  to  drunkards,  that  it  should  not  be  sold  to  minors, 
and  that  it  should  not  be  sold  on  the  Sabbath.  Every  one  of  these  restric- 
tions, excepting  the  one  forbidding  the  sale  of  liquor  on  the  Sabbath,  was 
violated  day  in  and  day  out.  On  the  Sabbath  the  public  stores  were  not 
open.  I  remember  perfectly  well  of  being  told  of  one  house  in  that  village, 
from  which,  within  thirty-five  years  prior  to  the  time  that  the  information 
was  given  me,  thirty-five  men  and  women — heads  of  families — had  gone  down 
to  drunkards'  graves.  That  statement  made  a  deep  impression  upon  my 
mind,  and  from  that  time  I  have  endeavored  to  do  what  I  could  to  stay  this 
tremendous  evil. 

Q.     Are  you  in  the  habit  of  freely  prescribing  alcoholic  remedies  ? 

A.  I  do  it  as  seldom^  as  possible.  There  are  cases  of  great  prostration 
from  profuse  hemorrhage  or  other  causes,  where  the  stimulation  of  alcohol 
may  be  required  ;  but  I  have  given  it  in  very  few  instances.  I  think  that  the 
practice  of  some  of  our  physicians,  of  recommending  it  in  almost  all  cases  of 
indisposition,  and  especially  in  consumption,  with  cod  liver  oil,  has  been  pro- 
ductive of  very  injurious  effects,  not  only  to  the  patients  themselves  but  to  the 
community. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  it  is  advisable  to  license  the  sale  of  liquors  and  place 
them  in  the  way  of  all  parties  ? 

A.     In  my  opinion,  most  certainly  not. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DR.  NATHAN  ALLEN. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Where  do  you  live  ? 

A.    In  Lowell. 

Q.  For  how  many  years  have  you  been  connected  with  the  Board  of 
State  Charities  ? 

A.     Three  years  ;  since  the  Board  was  organized. 

Q.    You  are  a  practising  physician  of  Lowell  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     For  how  many  years  have  you  resided  there  ? 

A.     Twenty-seven  years. 

Q.     Are  you  engaged  in  the  continual  practice  of  medicine  as  a  profession  ? 

A.     I  am. 

Q.     Are  there  other  physicians  upon  the  Board  of  State  Charities  ? 

A.     There  are  two  others. 

Q.     How  many  members  are  there  of  the  Board  ? 

A.     There  are  seven  members  in  all. 

Q.  Will  you  state  the  results  of  your  observations  in  general,  or,  if  you 
prefer,  with  special  reference  to  the  inquiry  now  before  this  Committee  ? 

A.  Do  you  desire  my  opinion  concerning  intemperance  as  the  cause  of 
vice,  poverty  and  crime  ? 

Q.  The  relation  of  intemperance  to  poverty,  disease  and  crime,  and  if  you 
have  arrived  at  any  conclusions  upon  the  subject,  the  effect  upon  the  progeny 
of  those  who  are  accustomed  to  drink  liquor  ? 

A.  I  am  not  aware  that  at  present  there  are  any  statistics,  showing  defi- 
nitely the  relation  of  intemperance  to  crime.  It  must,  in  a  measure,  be  a 


780  APPENDIX. 

matter  of  opinion  derived  from  observation.  In  former  times,  very  accurate 
statistics  have  been  made  in  reference  to  poverty  and  crime,  as  connected 
with  intemperance.  In  the  matter  of  crime,  I  believe,  however,  that  the 
matter  was  carefully  investigated  by  our  board  last  year,  in  connection  with 
the  houses  of  correction  and  the  State  Prison.  The  Secretary  investigated 
the  subject  last  year  and  reported  that  from  three-fourths  to  four-fifths  of  the 
crime  for  which  persons  were  inmates  of  the  House  of  Correction  and  State 
Prison  might  be  traced  to  intemperance.  Other  causes  doubtless  operate  with 
this,  rendering  it  difficult  in  many  cases  to  make  a  separation.  In  the  alms- 
houses,  perhaps  four-fifths  of  the  inmates  were  brought  there  by  intemperance. 
Some  have  estimated  the  proportion  as  larger  than  that.  Many  causes 
operate  in  connection  with  intemperance,  especially  with  the  foreign  element, 
which  is  nearly  nine-tenths  of  the  entire  number  of  inmates  in  the  almshouses, 
and  the  proportion  of  the  foreign  element  is  equally  large,  in  the  insane 
department.  Between  five  and  six  hundred  persons  are  supported  by  the 
State  in  the  insane  asylum,  and  a  large  proportion  of  the  cases  of  insanity  are 
occasioned  by  intemperance.  I  believe  that  about  one-half  of  the  cases  of 
insanity  may  be  traced  to  intemperance.  I  refer  now  to  the  cases  of  insanity 
that  are  treated  by  the  State  in  the  public  hospitals.  That  proportion  will 
vary  if  you  go  out  of  the  State  institutions ;  it  will  vary  according  to  the 
classes  that  have  become  insane,  whether  from  low  life  or  high  life. 

The  great  tendency  of  intemperance  to  depreciate  the  physical  organization 
generally  is  a  matter  perhaps  difficult  to  verify  by  accurate  statistics,  but  it  is 
one  on  which  opinions  do  not  difTer.  Intemperance  takes  away  the  capacity 
and  vital  force  of  the  system,  as  well  as  the  capacity  of  the  brain,  to  support 
life ;  I  mean  the  ability  to  obtain  a  livelihood,  and  to  be  successful  in  any 
kind  of  business.  The  tendency  in  that  direction  as  exhibited  in  our  State 
institutions,  is  very  marked  and  decided,  but  of  course  it  is  not  confined  there. 
The  whole  tendency  and  influence  of  intemperance  is  downward,  both 
physically  and  mentally.  These  are  influences  which  it  is  impossible  to 
appreciate  or  fully  comprehend. 

Q.  Has  the  Board  of  State  Charities  felt  called  upon  to  express  an  opinion 
covering  this  general  point  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  In  the  report  made  a  year  ago  to  the  Legislature,  in  dis- 
cussing the  dependent  class  and  the  criminal  class  in  the  community,  they 
were  led  to  investigate  the  causes  of  dependence  and  of  crime.  That  subject 
was  considered  of  radical  and  fundamental  importance  to  the  legislator.  That 
report  investigated  the  causes  of  poverty  and  crime,  and  also  discussed  the 
effect  of  intemperance  upon  hereditary  descent. 

Q.  In  respect  to  prescribing  alcoholic  preparations,  what  is  your  opinion 
of  the  general  usage  of  the  medical  profession  ? 

A.  I  avoid  such  prescriptions  as  far  as  possible.  I  think  that  the  medical 
profession  exert  an  influence  throughout  the  community  that  is  difficult  to 
appreciate  fully.  If  we  had  organizations  that  were  in  a  healthy  state,  as 
nature  designed  they  should  be,  we  probably  should  not  find  it  necessary  to 
prescribe  alcoholic  liquors;  but,  taking  human  nature  as  we  find  it,  their 
prescription  is  necessary  to  some  extent,  not  as  a  beverage,  but  as  medicine. 


APPENDIX.  781 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Are  you  in  favor  of  retaining  the  present  law 
just  as  it  is  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  have  no  objections  to  a  license  law  in  a  State  where  a  pro- 
hibitory law  cannot  be  enforced. 

Q.  Are  you  willing  to  have  the  law  so  changed  as  to  leave  the  municipal- 
ities to  decide  the  question  of  prohibition,  subject  to  State  supervision  and 
control  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  in  the  cities. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Do  you  base  this  opinion  upon  the  assumption  that 
the  law  cannot  be  executed  in  the  cities,  or  do  you  base  it  upon  your  profes- 
sional judgment  as  to  the  utility  of  alcoholic  beverages  ? 

A.     It  is  upon  the  first. 

Q.  If,  then,  it  should  appear  that  the  law  could  be  executed  in  the  cities, 
as  well  as  the  towns,  you  would  reverse  your  judgment  on  that  point  ? 

A-.     I  should,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DR.  A.  J.  BELLOWS. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  are  a  practitioner  of  medicine  in  the  city  of 
Boston  ? 

A.    I  am. 

Q.  Have  you  given  much  consideration  to  the  subject  of  chemistry  and 
physiology  as  applied  to  the  preservation  of  health  ? 

A.  I  have,  perhaps,  as  any  other  man  of  my  age,  having  for  twenty  years 
given,  on  an  average,  at  least  one  lecture  per  week  to  classes  of  from  one 
hundred  to  two  hundred  young  ladies,  upon  the  subject  of  chemistry  and 
physiology  as  applied  to  the  preservation  of  health. 

Q.  I  would  like  to  know  your  opinion  upon  the  question  whether  alcoholic 
drinks  are  useful  for  nutriment,  and  if  so,  to  what  extent  ? 

A.  As  my  opinion  differs  so  essentially  from  that  of  the  learned  gentle- 
men who  testified  here  last  week,  I  would  prefer  to  give  the  opinion  of  others 
whose  opinion  would  be  of  more  value.  Dr.  Carpenter  is  an  English  author 
upon  physiology,  whose  book  has  been  republished  in  this  country,  and  is  now 
the  standard  work  in  Harvard  College  represented  in  the  catalogue,  and 
recommended  to  the  students  as  a  standard  work  upon  that  subject.  On  page 
77  of  his  work  on  Physiology,  Carpenter  says : — 

"1.  It  may  be  safely  affirmed  that  alcohol  cannot  answer  any  one  purpose 
for  which  the  use  of  water  is  required  in  the  system ;  but  on  the  other  hand 
to  antagonize  many  of  those  purposes. 

"  2.  Alcoholic  liquids  cannot  supply  anything  which  is  essential  to  the  due 
nutrition  of  the  system. 

"  3.  The  action  of  alcohol  upon  the  living  body  is  essentially  that  of  stim- 
ulus, increasing  for  a  time  the  vital  activity  of  the  body,  but  being  followed 
by  a  corresponding  depression  of  power,  which  is  the  more  prolonged  and 
severe  in  proportion  as  the  previous  excitement  has  been  greater." 

Professor  Wood,  of  Philadelphia,  in  his  United  States  Dispensatory,  says  the 
habitual  use  of  alcoholic  drinks  produces  deplorable  consequences. 

Professor  Jacob  Bigelow  of  Boston,  and  formerly  a  professor  in  Harvard 
University,  expresses  the  same  opinion  as  Dr.  Carpenter,  in  Biyclow's  Sequel. 


782  APPENDIX. 

Not  having  been  so  familiar  with  the  books  for  a  few  years  as  others,  I 
invited  an  intelligent  student  of  Harvard  University,  just  now  completing  his 
studies,  to  get  for  me  any  authority  on  this  subject  that  was  not  in  accordance 
with  that  sentiment,  and  he  informed  me  that  he  was  not  able  to  find  any. 

The  question  is  whether  a  stimulant  can  be  nutritive.  To  my  mind,  it  is 
precisely  the  same  as  asking  the  question  whether  the  whip  is  a  nutritive  to 
the  horse  because  it  makes  his  muscles  get  stronger  and  makes  him  bring  up 
the  load  to  tho  top  of  the  hill  which  he  would  not  bring  up  but  for  the  whip. 
That  is  my  understanding  of  the  influence  of  alcohol,  and  it  is  the  only  object 
for  which  I  have  ever  used  it.  This"  is  what  all  the  books  teach,  but  the  pro- 
fessors as  we  have  seen,  teach  differently.  We  had  the  testimony  of  four  or 
five  last  week,  that  alcohol  was  nutritive.  Now,  it  may  be  difficult  to  under- 
stand why  the  professors  and  their  books  should  teach  such  different  doctrines. 
I  will  give  you  an  explanation  in  the  words  of  one  of  these  professors  himself. 
Professor  Oliver  Wendell  Holmes  said,  in  an  address  before  a  medical 
society  some  three  or  four  years  ago,  entitled  "  Currents  and  Counter-Currents 
in  Medical  Science  n : — 

"  The  truth  is,  that  medicine  professedly  founded  on  observation,  is  as  sensi- 
tive to  outside  influences,  political,  religious,  philosophical,  imaginative,  as  is 
the  barometer  to  the  changes  of  atmospheric  density." 

There  have  been,  upon  this  subject,  in  exact  accordance  with  the  testimony 
just  given  by  the  professor,  three  distinct  changes  of  opinions  of  medical  men 
upon  that  subject.  Forty-two  years  ago,  when  I  was  in  that  institution,  almost 
everybody  in  Massachusetts  drank.  It  was  a  common  practice.  Then,  almost 
all  the  physicians  administered  alcohol  as  a  medicine,  and  thought  it  right. 
Twenty  or  twenty-five  years  after,  the  public  sentiment  upon  that  subject  had 
changed  ;  the  pressure  was  so  put  on  the  doctors  that  they  had  that  opinion 
forced  out  of  them,  and  at  that  time  no  respectable  man  would  have  come 
here  and  made  the  statement  that  stimulant  was  nutritive.  At  that  time,  one 
of  our  leading  men,  Dr.  Worthington  Hooker,  wrote  an  essay  upon  the  evils 
of  stimulation,  stating,  after  a  practice  of  twenty  years,  in  cases  of  typhus  fever 
of  a  certain  form,  in  which  the  mortality  had  been  very  great,  that  he 
believed,  after  all,  that  it 'was  an  opium  and  brandy  disease.  lie  thought 
thaf,  the  remedy  was  the  cause  of  the  disease,  and  recommended  an  entirely 
different  course  of  treatment. 

Twenty  years  more  have  come  over  us,  and  the  pressure  is  taken  off,  the 
mercury  of  the  "barometer  "  falls,  and  we  now  have  Prof.  Holmes  illustrating 
his  own  doctrine  in  these  words:  "Alcoholic  combinations  act  dietetically 
upon  the  human  system,  as  well  as  medicinally."  Admitting  that  alcoholic 
combinations  do  act  dietetically,  I  wish  to  inquire  what  excuse,  or  what 
reason  we  have  for  using  them  when  we  have  everything  that  is  necessary, 
furnished  to  our  hands  ?  Nature  has  provided  for  man,  that  wherever  he 
lives,  whether  with  the  polar  bear  in  Greenland,  or  with  the  monkey  under 
the  equator,  he  can  find  warm  and  nourishing  food  adapted  to  the  cold 
climate,  or  with  the  monkey  in  the  hot  regions,  he  has  furnished  him  food 
cooling  and  proper  for  his  system.  Wherever  he  is,  he  can  find  just  the  right 
kind  of  nourishment  that  is  adapted  to  his  condition.  If  he  is  feverish,  he  can 


APPENDIX.  783 

have  fruits  which  are  cooling,  or  if  cold,  he  can  have  sugar  which  is  warming. 
Now  under  such  circumstances  what  excuse  have  we  for  using  a  material 
obtained  by  chemical  process,  when  we  have  such  arrangements  made  by 
God  for  the  supply  of  every  human  being  ? 

Q.  There  has  been  a  great  deal  said  about  the  formation  and  the  destruc- 
tion of  tissue.  What,  in  your  opinion,  is  the  effect  of  alcohol  upon  the 
tissue  ? 

A.     Prof.  Yeomans,  of  New  York,  says : 

"It  has  been  demonstrated  that  alcoholic  drinks  prevent  the  natural 
changes  going  on  in  the  blood  and  obstruct  the  nutritive  and  reparative 
functions." 

Prof.  Carpenter,  in  his  Physiology,  says :  "  Alcoholic  drinks  diminish  the 
waste  of  the  tissues  ; "  that  is,  they  suspend  the  action  of  the  brain  and  mus- 
cles and  other  organs  and  functions  of  the  system,  and  if  perseveringly  con- 
tinued, bring  us  down  to  a  state  or  torpidity,  like  snakes  and  toads  and  other 
cold-blooded  animals,  who  preserve  their  tissues  wonderfully,  by  masterly 
inactivity.  Perhaps  you  have  noticed  a  toad  in  the  garden,  sitting  hour  after 
hour,  and  day  after  day,  with  only  energy  enough  to  wink,  or  to  catch  a  fly  if 
it  comes  within  an  inch  of  his  nose.  He  has  a  wonderful  power  of  preserving 
the  tissues.  They  will  last  for  years  and  years  if  they  are  confined  where 
they  cannot  get  out,  as  they  have  been  before  now,  in  the  bark  of  a  tree.  It 
seems  to  me  that  the  toad  is  a  very  good  personification  of  the  bloated,  beer- 
drinking,  Pennsylvania  Dutchman,  who  will  sit  from  morning  until  night  with 
just  energy  enough  to  lift  a  mug  to  his  mouth  and  call  for  more  when  it  is 
empty.  The  question  occurs  to  my  mind,  whether  such  tissues  are  worth 
preserving.  When  I  was  a  student,  the  doctrine  was>  that  it  was  not  best  to 
preserve  the  tissues  ;  that  it  was  best  for  a  man  to  live  in  active  exercise,  to 
use  his  muscles  and  his  brain,  so  as  to  exhaust  the  tissues  and  get  new  ones 
every  day.  It  was  never  supposed  that  it  was  best  to  preserve  the  tissues. 

Q.  You  claim  that  this  waste  of  tissue  is  a  natural  operation,  which  ought 
to  go  on  ;  is  it  ever  excessive  or  continuous  ? 

A.    It  is  very  seldom  excessive. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  additional  that  you  would  like  to  say  upon  this 
subject  ? 

A.  I  have  some  authorities  that  I  would  like  to  offer  in  reply  to  the 
strange  positions  taken  by  some  of  the  learned  gentlemen  the  other  day. 

Q.    We  should  like  to  hear  you  ? 

A.  With  regard  to  stimulants  as  a  medicine,  I  have  made  some  observa- 
tions. Keeping  in  mind  that  the  synonyme  of  stimulant  is  a  goad,  I  have  no 
difficulty  in  coming  to  a  conclusion  when  it  is  useful  as  a  medicine.  I.  have 
stood  by  the  bed-side  of  a  sinking  patient,  when  the  pulse  was  falling  rapidly, 
and  I  have  feared  that  nature  would  not  be  able  to  rally,  and  have  given  a 
stimulant,  a  goad  to  whip  up  poor  sinking  nature,  and  in  a  few  moments  the 
pulse  would  rise,  but  would  fall  again  very  soon.  It  might  be  carefully 
renewed  until  nature  was  able  to  devote  some  nourishment.  I  believe  that 
patients  may  have  been  saved  by  the  use  of  stimulants  in  such  a  manner. 
That  is  the  only  use  that  I  have  ever  made  of  stimulants.  There  are  some  • 
authorities  upon  that  point  to  which  I  will  refer. 


784  APPENDIX. 

In  his  treaties  on  the  Immediate  Cause  and  the  Specific  Treatment  of  Pul- 
monary Phthisis,  Dr.  J.  Francis  Churchill,  a  celebrated  French  physician, 
quotes  as  follows  from  a  prize  essay  by  Dr.  John  Bell,  of  New  York,  upon  the 
effects  of  alcoholic  liquors  in  tubercular  disease,  or  in  constitutions  predisposed 
to  such  disease  : — 

"  The  opinion,  so  largely  prevailing,  as  to  the  effects  of  the  use  of  alcoholic 
liquors,  viz.,  that  they  have  a  marked  influence  in  preventing  the  deposition  of 
tubercle,  is  destitute  of  any  solid  foundation. 

"  On  the  contrary,  their  use  predisposes  to  tubercular  deposition.  Where 
tubercle  already  exists,  alcohol  has  no  Affect  in  modifying  the  usual  course  run 
by  that  substance. 

"  Neither  does  it  mitigate  the  morbid  effects  of  tubercle  upon  the  system 
in  any  stage  of  the  disease." 

I  believe  that  that  is  all  that  I  have  to  offer  upon  the  subject  of  stimulation. 

There  was  testimony  given  here  the  other  day  to  the  effect  that  the  drink- 
ing usages  of  society  were  not  to  be  deplored.  Prof.  Wood,  of  Philadelphia, 
in  the  United  States  Dispensatory,  says  that  "  the  habitual  use  of  alcoholic 
drinks  produced  deplorable  consequences."  Prof.  Carpenter,  in  the  standard 
work  of  Harvard  College,  on  Physiology,  says, — 

"  The  physiological  objection  to  the  habitual  use  of  even  small  quantities 
of  alcoholic  drinks,  rests  upon  the  following  grounds :  They  are  universally 
admitted  to  possess  a  poisonous  character.  They  tend  to  produce  a  morbid 
condition  of  the  body  at  large.  The  capacity  for  enduring  the  extremes  of 
heat  and  cold,  or  mental  or  bodily  labor,  is  diminished,  rather  than  increased 
by  their  habitual  employment." 

Prof.  Jacob  Bigelow,  in  1825,  used  these  words  : 

"  Alcohol  is  highly  stimulating,  heating,  and  intoxicating,  and  its  effects  are 
so  fascinating  that  when  once  experienced,  the  danger  is  that  the  desire  for 
them  may  be  perpetuated,  and  many  patients  have  become  gradually  and 
imperceptibly  intemperate  under  the  sanction  and  guidance  of  a  physician." 

Forty-two  years  afterwards,  a  son  of  Prof.  Jacob  Bigelow,  and  a  professor 
in  the  same  College,  says,  "  In  regard  to  the  drinking  practices  of  society,  I  do 
not  think  they  are  to  be  deplored." 

I  think  that  the  influence  of  Dr.  Jacob  Bigelow's  words  has  saved  many 
and  many  a  drunkard.  I  was  then  a  young  man,  just  commencing  my  studies, 
and  hearing  that  testimony  from  a  gentleman  I  so  highly  esteemed  and  respec- 
ted, I  resolved  that  I  would  never  be  guilty  of  making  a  man  a  drunkard,  or 
lead  him  imperceptibly  and  gradually  to  intemperance.  From  that  day  to  this, 
I  not  only  have  not  used  it  myself,  but  I  have  never  prescribed  to  a  single 
patient  any  alcoholic  liquors,  in  any  form,  "except  as  I  have  indicated, — 
in  a  low  state  of  disease,  when  it  was  necessary,  temporarily,  to  whip  up 
nature  as  you  whip  up  a  horse.  I  have  seen  those  words  verified  in 
hundreds  and  hundreds  of  cases,  where  men  have  been  and  are  now  being  led 
imperceptibly  and  gradually  down  towards  intemperance.  I  meet  such  cases 
almost  every  week  of  my  life. 

Q.  Referring  to  your  statement  of  the  change  of  views  of  the  medical 
profession  upon  this  subject,  do  you  recollect  what  Dr.  Holmes  once  said  in 
regard  to  the  value  of  alcohol  and  other  drugs  ? 

A.  I  remember  his  words  quite  well,  and  think  that  I  can  repeat  them. 
He  said :  "  Throw  out  wine  and  throw  out  opium,  and  if  all  the  rest  of  the 


APPENDIX.  785 

drugs  were  sunk  into  the  bottom  of  the  ocean,  it  would  be  all  the  better  for 
mankind  and  all  the  worse  for  the  fishes." 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)     To  what  school  of  medicine  do  you  belong  ? 

A.    I  graduated  at  Harvard  College. 

Q.     To  what  school  of  medicine  do  you  now  belong  ? 

A.    I  practice  Homecepathy. 

Q.  Are  the  extracts  that  you  have  read  extracts  that  you  have  made 
yourself  from  the  books  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     All  of  them  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  particular  office,  then,  did  the  medical  student  to  whom  you  have 
just  referred,  perform  ? 

A.     He  referred  me  to  them. 

Q.     He  did  not  make  the  extracts  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    Have  you  Dr.  Carpenter's  book  ? 

A.     I  have,  at  home. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  Dr.  Carpenter  himself,  in  his  book  upon  physi- 
ology, in  the  classification  of  food,  puts  alcohol  into  the  same  category  with 
sugar  and  starch  ? 

A.    I  am  not ;  if  he  does,  I  can  prove  that  he  is  wrong. 

Q.  You  have  quoted  to  show  that  these  medical  gentlemen  connected  with 
Harvard  College  entertained  some  new  or  recent  opinion  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  only  meant  to  give  an  illustration  of  Dr.  Holmes's  opinion, 
and  to  show  that  their  opinion  was  subject  to  the  pressure  of  the  influence  of 
the  community. 

Q.  Then  what  you  mean  to  say  is  that  those  gentlemen  who  came  here, 
and  on  their  professional  honor,  did  so  under  the  supposed  pressure  of  some 
outside  pressure,  and  not  as  honorable  men  ? 

A.    I  state  no  inference,  but  just  read  the  testimony. 

Q.     Then  why  did  you  make  the  remark  ? 

A.     What  remark  ? 

Q.     In  reference  to  the  influence  of  society  and  public  opinion  ? 

A.  I  read  to  you  the  testimony  in  order  to  explain  the  extraordinary  fact 
that  while  the  books  of  the  professors  teach  one  thing,  the  professors  them- 
selves teach  another. 

Q.  Let  us,  then,  see  what  the  books  teach.  Does  not  Dr.  Carpenter  him- 
self say  that  there  are  conditions  of  the  human  system  in  which  the  occasional, 
or  even  habitual,  use  of  alcoholic  liquors  may  be  beneficial  and  necessary  ? 

A.    It  may  be  that  it  is  so. 

Q.  Then  all  the  books  do  not  teach  the  doctrine  that  you  have  laid  down, 
and  it  is  necessary  for  you  to  modify  that  remark  as  applied  to  Dr.  Car* 
penter  ? 

A.    I  have  no  objecti!  i  to  that. 

Q.  What  does  Liebig,  the  father  of  modern  medical  chemistry,  teach  upon 
that  subject  ? 

A.     I  would  like  to  prove,  from  Liebig  himself,  that  it  could  not  be  true. 
99 


786  APPENDIX. 

Q.  What  docs  Liebig  teach  ?  The  argument  that  you  make  is,  that  those 
professors  came  here  and  testified  to  something  that  contradicts  the  teachings 
of  all  the  books.  Does  not  Liebig  divide  food  into  two  general  categories, — 
first,  the  plastic  food,  like  those  containing  fibrine  and  casine  on  the  one 
hand,  and  the  respiratory  food,  which  include  sugar,  starch  and  alcohol  upon 
the  other ;  is  not  that  what  Liebig  teaches,  no  matter  whether  it  be  right  or 
wrong  ? 

A.  I  am  not  aware  that  he  does.  If  he  does,  I  can  show  Liebig,  or  any 
other  man,  that  alcohol  is  not  among  that  class,  nor  can  it  be  put  into  that 
system  in  any  possible  way. 

Q.  You  have  given  your  opinion,  and  I  am  trying  to  see  if  you  are  correct 
in  saying  that  those  gentlemen  contradict  the  books.  Do  you  not  know  that 
if  Liebig  is  famous  for  anything  in  the  world,  it  is  for  having  made  just  that  a 
classification  of  food,  and  becoming  the  father  of  a  school  of  thought  upon 
that  subject? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  Prof.  Johnston,  in  his  familiar  lectures  upon  chemis- 
try, teaches  the  same  thing,  and  classes  alcohol  as  a  food  ? 

A .  1  could  not  state  to  the  contrary,  but  I  do  not  think  that  he  is  in  the 
catalogue  to  which  I  referred,  as  being  authority.  I  have  endeavored  to  get 
out  of  their  catalogue  all  that  I  could. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  perhaps  the  most  eminent  man  in  this  country, 
in  the  department  of  human  physiology  is  Dr.  John  C.  Dalton  of  New  York, 
and  do  you  not  know  that  he  teaches  the  same  thing  ?  * 

A.     It  was  not  to  his  books  I  referred. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  he  is  one  of  the  most  brilliant  physiologists  in 
this  country  ? 

A.     I  am  aware  that  he  is  a  brilliant  physiologist. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know,  also,  that  Dr.  Brinton  and  Professor  Lewes  of  Eng- 
land have  taught  the  same  thing  ? 

A.    Perhaps  they  have,  but  they  are  all  wrong. 

Q.  And  that  Dr.  Brinton  goes  so  far  as  to  say  that  the  extent  to  which 
total  abstinence  has  been  carried  by  a  large  class  of  abstainers  in  England, 
has  been  an  injury  to  the  health  of  a  large  portion  of  them  ? 

A.     It  may  be  so,  but  I  will  prove  that  they  are  all  wrong  in  five  minutes. 

Q.  No  matter  whether  they  are  right  or  wrong.  You  have  arraigned 
those  medical  gentlemen  of  Harvard  College,  who  testified  here,  for  con- 
tradicting the  books.  Do  you  know  that  Professor  Anstie,  of  Westminster 
College,  and  Professor  of  Toxicology,  published,  in  1864,  a  book  entitled 
Stimulants  and  Narcotics,  in  which  he  advocates  the  use  of  alcoholic  drinks 
(upon  a  theory  differing  from  that  of  Liebig),  for  the  purpose  of  sustaining 
the  human  system,  even  in  cases  not  of  disease  ? 

A.     I  believe  that  book  is  not  upon  the  catalogue. 

Q.     That  is,  not  upon  your  catalogue  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  In  what  you  have  said  about  the  tissues,  are  you  not  aware  that  you 
have  been  criticizing  the  very  theory  that  Liebig  originated  ? 

A.     I  suppose  that  I  have. 

*  See  note  on  page  894. 


APPENDIX.  787 

Q.  Do  you  not  know,  as  a  medical  man,  that  there  are  many  cases  in 
which  it  is  necessary  to  retard  the  metamorphosis  of  the  tissue,  because  it  is 
one  of  the  features  of  disease,  and  do  you  not  know  that  water  sometimes 
operates  in  the  same  way  as  alcohol,  in  retarding  that  metamorphosis  ? 

A.  I  do  not  believe  it,  nor  do  I  believe  that  alcohol  is  the  right  thing  to 
use  when  it  is  necessary  to  retard  the  metamorphosis. 

Q.  But  you  have  just  now  planted  yourself  upon  the  ground  that  it  is  not 
right  at  all  to  retard  the  metamorphosis  of  the  tissue,  and  now,  as  a  medical 
man,  you  put  yourself  in  the  attitude  of  adhering  to  the  proposition  that  it  is 
not  right  in  a  large  class  of  cases  ? 

A.  I  simply  asked  the  question  whether  tissues  were  worth  preserving  in 
that  way. 

Q.     Is  it  not  very  frequently  desirable  ? 

A.  I  have  never  seen  an  instance,  in  forty  years'  practice,  where  I  thought 
that  alcohol  was  necessary  for  that  purpose. 

Q.  Have  you  never  seen  a  case  where  the  retardation  of  the  metamorpho- 
sis of  the  tissue  was  necessary  ? 

A.  I  have  seen  such  cases,  but  never  thought  that  alcohol  was  the  right 
thing  to  employ. 

Q.  Then  you  retire  from  the  position  that  metamorphosis  of  the  tissue  is 
not  to  be  retarded  ?  You  speak  from  experience,  if  I  understand  you,  in 
saying  that  no  drink  into  which  alcohol  enters  is  an  article  of  food,  or  helps  to 
sustain  the  constitution  as  food  ? 

A.  I  do  not  say  that,  because  there  is  a  great  deal  of  sugar  in  wine.  If  it 
is  useful  for  food  it  is  upon  account  of  the  sugar  it  contains,  and  not  upon 
account  of  the  alcohol. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  Cornaro,  an  Italian  nobleman,  sustained  himself 
for  forty  or  fifty  years  upon  twelve  ounces  of  bread  and  fourteen  ounces  of 
wine  per  day  ? 

A.  I  have  heard  of  that  case,  but  I  do  not  know  what  it  has  to  do  with 
alcohol. 

Q.  Have  you  not  known  cases  where  persons,  prostrated  by  disease,  were 
sustained,  almost  wholly,  by  strong  alcoholic  drinks,  like  brandy  ? 

A.  For  a  very  short  time  it  may  be  necessary,  but  only  until  something 
else  could  be  introduced  upon  which  the  system  could  act. 

Q.     Is  it  not  often  done  for  days  together,  by  medical  men  ? 

A.     It  is  never  done,  to  my  knowledge,  unless  sugar  is  added  to  the  liquor. 

Q.    I  refer  to  cases  where  pure  brandy  or  other  liquor  is  used  ? 

A.  I  never  saw  such  a  case,  and  I  never  knew  a  doctor  to  give  brandy 
without  the  addition  of  sugar. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Liebig  is  pressed  here  in  testimony  in  physiological 
matters ;  are  you  not  aware  that  the  latest  English  and  French  physiologists 
have  repudiated  Liebig  ? 

A.     They  repudiate  some  things  in  Liebig. 

Q.    Do  they  not  repudiate  his  doctrine  that  alcohol  is  food  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 


788  APPENDIX. 


TWENTY-SECOND    DAY. 

THURSDAY,  March  28, 1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  the  hearing  of  testimony  on 
behalf  of  the  Remonstrants  was  resumed. 

TESTIMONY  OP  JULIUS  A.  PALMER. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     How  long  have  you  been  in  business  in  Boston  ? 

A.     Forty-three  years. 

Q.     Have  you  been  interested  in  the  temperance  cause  ? 

A .  Yes,  sir ;  I  believe  I  joined  the  first  teetotal  society  which  was  organized 
here,  thirty-six  years  ago. 

Q.  During  that  time  have  your  opportunities  given  you  any  knowledge  as 
to  the  evils  of  intemperance  and  the  means  resorted  to  for  suppressing  them  ? 

A.  I  became  early  associated  with  societies  for  relieving  the  poor,  distrib- 
uting the  bounties  of  such  societies.  I  have  also  been  for  several  years 
Overseer  of  the  Poor ;  and  in  the  Primary  School  Committee  ;  and  a  Director 
in  the  House  of  Industry  some  years  ;  and  a  Visitor  in  the  Lunatic  Hospital  • 
and  a  member  of  the  city  government,  and  have  represented  the  city  three  or 
four  years  in  the  Legislature.  And  I  have  by  these  connections  been  brought 
very  much  in  contact  with  the  lower  classes  of  society  and  have  noticed  the 
causes  of  their  poverty  and  suffering  and  crime.  I  will  say,  sir,  that  in  the 
city  Lunatic  Hospital  I  rarely  ever  saw  a  temperate  patient.  I  never  expected 
to  find  an  inmate  there  who  was  not  indulgent  in  the  use  of  intoxicating 
drinks.  And  in  the  House  of  Industry  the  rule  was  that  the  parties  brought 
their  poverty  and  other  distress  upon  them  by  intemperate  habits. 

Since  the  passage  of  the  prohibitory  law  I  have  been  connected  with 
various  associations.  We  have  made  efforts  to  get  the  City  Government  to 
enforce  that  law.  We  have  memorialized  the  City  Government,  and  I  have 
copies  here  of  resolutions  which  were  adopted  at  a  large  meeting  of  the 
citizens,  and  signed  by  a  very  large  and  respectable  committee  of  such  men 
as  Dr.  Gannett,  Lyman  Beecher,  Rev.  Dr.  Streeter,  Rev.  Dr.  Miner,  Rev. 
Baron  Stow,  and  a  large  number  of  prominent  merchants.  The  date  of  this  is 
June  20th,  1853.  Here  is  a  copy  also  of  an  address  to  the  citizens  in  behalf 
of  the  execution  of  the  Massachusetts  prohibitory  law,  which  bears  similar 
names,  and  also  a  memorial  to  the  City  Government — the  Mayor  and  Alder- 
men— in  favor  of  enforcing  the  law.  And  I  have  here  also  the  published 
accounts  of  several  meetings  held  on  different  occasions  with  reference  to 
putting  the  means  of  intemperance  out  of  the  way.  One  of  these  meetings 
was  addressed  by  Rev.  Mr.  Burton,  minister  at  large,  in  which  he  stated  from 
his  own  observation  that  intemperance  was  fearfully  on  the  increase.  The 
date  of  this  was  1846.  Among  these  names  are  the  names  of  Dr.  Channing 
and  Dr.  Tuckerman.  I  very  well  remember  the  occasion  and  a  number  of 
those  who  were  present  at  the  time.  The  house  was  packed,  and  the  agents 
of  the  several  societies  for  the  relief  of  the  poor  were  there.  The  date 


APPENDIX.  789 

is  Monday  evening.  This  is  from  the  "Courier"  of  December  18th,  1853. 
Rev.  Dr.  Waterston  made  a  very  stirring  speech,  setting  forth  the  evils  of 
intemperance. '  Hon.  John  C.  Park  also  made  an  address,  and  the  addresses 
were  all  in  one  strain,  showing  that  intemperance  was  greatly  on  the  increase, 
and  calling  on  our  public  authorities  to  enforce  the  law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  What  do  your  facts  show  you  relative  to  the  time 
that  the  reformation  seemed  to  culminate  here  in  Boston  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  according  to  my  recollection,  and  I  have  refreshed  my 
memory  from  statistics  here,  the  cause  was  going  on  under  the  principle  of 
moral  suasion  until  the  Washingtonian  movement  commenced  in  1841.  I 
think  it  was  then  rather  taken  out  of  the  hands  of  the  religious  community. 
There  seemed  to  be  a  great  desire  to  hear  reformed  inebriates  at  the  public 
meetings,  and  the  addresses  fell  very  much  into  that  line,  and  the  cause  went  by 
default  into  the  hands  of  Washingtonians,  and  it  ran  for  some  three  years  under 
their  auspices,  until  it  came  to  be  the  fact  that  then  our  public  meetings  were 
talked  to  by  reformed  inebriates,  and  the  interest  of  the  cause  subsided  in 
the  churches  and  Sabbath  school  classes.  Then  there  came,  in  1814  or  1845, 
a  reaction.  The  interest  in  the  Washingtonian  movement  had  run  out,  in  a 
measure,  and  the  good  men  who  had  been  engaged  in  the  cause  had  got  hold 
of  other  things,  and  I  think  that  from  1846  to  1851  intemperance  was  very 
much  increased.  I  have  here  a  report  made  by  the  Chief  of  Police  to  the 
city  government,  I  think,  about  that  date.  There  was  a  movement  about  this 
time  in  the  city  government,  and  the  City  Marshal  was  ordered  to  report  the 
whole  number  of  places  where  liquor  was  sold,  and  the  classification  of  them, 
and  how  many  kept  open  on  the  Sabbath,  and  he  returned  fifteen  hundred 
places  in  1851.  The  population  of  the  city,  if  I  remember  aright,  was  about 
one  hundred  and  twenty  thousand  at  that  time. 

Of  these  places,  490  were  kept  by  Americans,  100  by  Germans,  English  and 
Swedes,  and  900  by  Irish.  There  were  in  cellars  310,  and  1,190  above  ground. 
There  were  kept  by  males  1,374,  and  126  by  females,  and  there  were  979 
kept  open  on  the  Sabbath.  This  report  was  signed  by  the  City 'Marshal. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  I  would  like  your  opinion  as  to  the  disposition 
of  the  city  government  of  Boston  in  regard  to  the  enforcement  of  the  law  ? 

A.  There  has  never  been  any  disposition  on  the  part  of  the  city  government 
so  far  as  my  knowledge  extends,  to  have  the  law  enforced.  On  the  contrary, 
they  have  taken  measures,  from  time  to  time,  to  prevent  its  enforcement. 

Q.     Can  you  mention  any  particular  cases  V 

A.  I  happen  to  have  here  a  city  document  for  the  year  1855,  being  a  pre- 
amble and  resolutions  in  relation  to  the  enforcement  of  the  liquor  law,  and  I 
remember  the  circumstances.  Dr.  Smith  had  just  been  elected,  and  the  tem- 
perance vote  had  been  thrown  in  his  favor,  and  he  promised  to  enforce  the 
law.  There  was  a  fear  that  he  would  do  so,  and  it  was  desired,  on  the  part 
of  some,  to  head  him  off',  and  it  was  done  in  this  manner  :  After  he  had  issued 
his  instructions  to  the  police,  this  resolution  was  brought  forward  : — 

Whereas,  a  certain  proclamation  purporting  to  emanate  from  the  Mayor  of 
the  City  of  Boston,  has  lately  appeared ;  and  whereas  the  said  Mayor  of  Boston 
is  an  officer  of  the  City  of  Boston,  and  that  no  Ordinance  has  been  passed  by 


790  APPENDIX. 

the  Common  Council  of  Boston,  conferring  upon  the  said  Mayor  and  the 
Board  of  Aldermen  or  either  of  them  any  authority  to  employ  the  City 
Funds  or  the  City  Officers,  superior  or  inferior,  in  the  execution  of  the  Act, 
entitled,  "  An  Act  concerning  the  Manufacture  and  Sale  of  Spirituous 
Liquors,"  passed  April  20,  1855  ;  and  whereas,  in  no  shape  or  way  whatever 
have  any  of  the  Chartered  rights  and  powers  of  the  City  of  Boston  been 
delegated  to  the  Mayor  and  Board  of  Aldermen  or  either  of  them,  by  the 
City  of  Boston  on  account  of,  or  in  aid  of  the  said  Act;  and  whereas  it  is 
proper  and  just  that  the  Chartered  rights  of  the  City  should  be  protected  from 
infringement  or  usurpation  from  any  source  ; 

Therefore  be  it  Resolved,  That  the  powers  conferred  by  the  Act  entitled 
"  An  Act  concerning  the  Manufacture  and  Sale  of  Spirituous  Liquors  "  on 
the  Mayor  and  Board  of  Aldermen  of  this  City  constitute  them  in  that 
respect  State  officers,  as  distinct  from  their  Municipal  powers  derived  from 
their  election  under  the  City  Charter. 

Resolved,  That  all  officers  of  the  City  Government  be  expressly  prohibited 
from  employing  or  using  any  property  of  this  Corporation,  or  any  money  in 
its  Treasury,  or  the  credit  of  this  Corporation,  for  the  purpose  of  enforcing  or 
executing  "  An  Act  concerning  the  Manufacture  and  Sale  of  Spirituous 
Liquors;"  and  that  if  any  officer  under  salary  from  this  Corporation  shall 
devote  any  portion  of  his  time  to  the  execution  of  said  Act  of  the  Common- 
wealth of  Massachusetts,  he  shall  on  oath  report  to  the  accounting  officers  the 
amount  of  time  so  expended,  and  a  proportionable  amount  of  money  shall  be 
discounted  and  reserved  from  the  salary  allowed  from  this  Corporation.  And 
if  any  officer  of  this  Corporation  shall  falsely  return  the  amount  of  time  so 
expended,  he  ought  to  be  dismissed  from  the  service  of  this  Corporation  ;  and 
no  money  of  this  City  shall  ever  afterwards  be  applied  to  paying  such  persons 
any  salary  or  compensation  whatever. 

And  be  it  further  Resolved,  That  this  Corporation  in  no  way  authorizes  or 
empowers  its  officers  to  do  any  acts  for  or  on  account  of  the  execution  of 
"  An  Act  concerning  the  Manufacture  and  Sale  of  Spirituous  Liquors,"  but 
leaves  all  persons  to  derive  from  said  Act  their  authority,  compensation  and 
indemnity,  without  this  Corporation  in  any  way  conferring  or  delegating  the 
powers  on  them  conferred  by  their  Charter,  in  support  of  this  said  Act.  And 
that  any  action  of  the  Mayor  and  Board  of  Aldermen  of  the  City  of  Boston 
in  the  execution  of  said  Act  is  and  shall  be  regarded  and  understood  as 
altogether  independent  of,  and  without  the  sanction  of  the  City  of  Boston  in 
their  corporative  capacity. 

At  that  time  it  was  feared  that  there  might  be  a  majority  among  the  Board 
of  Aldermen  in  favor  of  the  law.  This  document  is  found  among  the  docu- 
ments of  that  time,  and  is  in  keeping  with  the  action  of  the  City  Government 
of  Boston  for  those  years  and  for  several  years  afterwards,  and  even  at  the 
present  time.  Perhaps  it  may  throw  some  light  on  the  question  which  you 
ask  as  to  the  disposition  of  the  City  Government,  if  I  state  a  fact  which 
comes  to  my  memory  now,  which  is  that  after  the  passage  of  the  prohibitory 
law,  and  before  it  went  into  execution,  which,  if  I  remember  aright,  was  in 
1852,  Mayor  Seaver  issued  between  four  and  five  hundred  (I  think  it  was  four 
hundred  and  sixty-three)  licenses  to  rumsellers  for  a  year. 

Q,     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     That  was  in  1852  ? 

A.     That  was  in  1852. 

Q.     While  the  bill  Avas  pending  ? 

A.  I  think  it  was  in  the  month  of  June,  and  the  law  went  into  operation 
on  the  first  of  July.  I  remember  there  was  a  hard  scrabble  around  the  City 
Hall  to  get  people  to  come  up  and  take  licenses  so  that  the  sale  should  not  be 
restrained. 


APPENDIX.  791 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONEE.)  In  regard  to  people  keeping  first-class  hotels 
without  selling  liquor,  what  is  your  judgment  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  think  that  keeping  a  rum-shop  in  a  hotel  is  an  incongruous 
affair.  It  is  not  necessary  to  have  our  first-class  hotels  keep  a  liquor  shop, 
any  more  than  it  is  that  they  should  keep  a  meat  shop.  I  have  had  occasion 
to  notice,  in  my  travels  abroad,  that  the  hotels  did  not  keep  open  bars,  and  I 
think  that  a  large  portion  of  the  travelling  public  who  come  to  the  city  of 
Boston  would  be  better  pleased  and  accommodated  to  go  into  hotels  where 
there  is  not  one  of  those  places.  With  regard  to  furnishing  liquors  to  be  served 
at  the  tables,  that  is  a  matter  of  more  difficulty.  If  it  was  a  matter  for  me 
to  determine,  I  should  not  complain  very  much  as  to  that ;  but  this  keeping 
bars  in  the  basement  of  hotels,  where  Harvard  students  and  other  young  men 
can  go  and  get  their  liquor,  and  are  tempted  to  go,  is  a  very  bad  thing. 

Q.    Would  it  be  difficult  to  separate  the  two  ? 

A .  I  suppose  there  would  be  some  ingenuity  by  which  the  liquor  would  be 
sold. 

Q.  But  if  the  law  was  enforced  and  no  hotels  sold  liquor,  of  course  persons 
would  supply  themselves  ? 

A.  I  think  that  a  large  portion  of  the  business  men  travelling  from  the 
West  and  South,  merchants  coming  from  the  West,  especially,  often  want  to 
bring  their  wives  with  them,  and  they  object  because  there  is  so  much 
carousing  in  the  rum  part  of  the  establishment. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  intemperance  has  increased  in  the  city  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  we  judge  such  things  very  much  according  to  the  stand- 
point we  take.  I  would  say  that  for  the  last  five  years  my  residence  has 
been  in  the  country.  Although  I  come  into  the  city  every  day  I  think  I  do 
not  circulate  among  the  people  as  much  as  I  used  to.  But  I  have  not  seen 
for  the  last  eight  or  ten  years  and  have  not  come  in  contact  with  nearly  as 
much  intemperance  as  I  used  to.  I  suppose  that  there  never  was  a  time 
when  if  men  were  disposed  to  go  among  people  of  the  lower  classes  of  society 
and  see  how  they  were  living  in  this  matter  they  would  think  that  intem- 
perance was  increasing.  It  depends  very  much  on  where  we  go.  I  suppose 
that  I  could  take  almost  any  clergyman  to  portions  of  the  city  where  he  would 
be  surprised  at  the  condition  of  the  people.  He  would  be  led  to  think  there 
never  was  such  a  time  for  hard  drinking  as  at  present,  because  he  had  never 
seen  it  before.  I  used  to  hear  this  remarked  in  1835,  and  in  1842  and  in  1850, 
and  I  saw  it  a  great  deal  worse  then  than  I  have  recently  ;  but  my  judgment, 
from  my  own  observation,  would  not  be  that  intemperance  is  on  the  increase 
in  the  city.  I  will  suggest  a  reason  for  the  opinion  that  it  is  on  the  increase 
which  I  have  not  heard  suggested.  I  have  not  attended  any  of  these 
hearings,  but  I  have  observed  in  going  over  the  railroads  that  it  is  the 
practice  of  some  young  men  and  of  some  older  men,  if  they  want  to 
have  a  good  time,  to  come  to  Boston.  The  liquor  law,  being  enforced  in 
the  country  towns,  drives  people  in  here,  and  when  they  get  here  they  have 
opportunities  for  getting  liquors  without  any  hindrance.  I  recollect  when 
they  used  to  go  out  fishing  and  stretched  out  their  seine,  that  when  they 
began  to  draw  in,  the  waters  would  all  be  smooth ;  but  after  a  time 
you  would  see  a  fin  here  and  there,  and  before  they  got  the  seine  nearly 


792  APPENDIX. 

drawn  in  there  would  be  quite  a  fluttering  ;  and  it  seems  to  me  that  the  tem- 
perance seine  is  being  drawn  down  here  to  Boston,  and  we  have  seen  the  fins 
flattering  a  good  deal  lately. 

Q.  As  between  the  prohibitory  law  and  a  license  law  what  is  your  judg- 
ment? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  am  not  in  favor  of  a  license  law,  because  the  past  license 
laws,  according  to  my  observation  and  knowledge  have  been  failures.  I  do 
not  think  that  they  have  done  any  good.  Sometimes  when  they  have  been 
first  enacted  there  have  been  clauses  in.  them  that  were  pretty  favorable  for 
the  -cause  of  temperance,  but  they  have  most  always  been  stricken  out  pretty 
soon.  Like  the  present  excise  law  in  New  York  there  has  already  been  a  new 
bill  introduced  for  the  purpose  of  changing  it  and  giving  more  freedom  to 
sellers.  This  is  the  case  now  in  New  York,  and  that  has  been  my  observation 
in  regard  to  past  license  laws  generally.  Whenever  they  have  had  clauses 
in  them  which  restricted  the  sale  of  liquor,  unfortunately  for  the  trade,  and 
so  as  to  promote  the  cause  of -temperance,  these  clauses  have  very  soon  been 
stricken  out  by  the  Legislatures. 

Q.     But  did  they  enforce  such  clauses  ? 

A.  I  was  just  going  to  speak  of  that.  I  have  never  known  a  license  law 
to  operate  to  the  restriction  of  the  sale  to  any  great  extent.  It  is  a  general 
license  to  sell,  under  any  license  law  that  we  have  ever  had. 

Q.  They  licensed  enough  so  that  there  was  no  inconvenience  to  any  person 
to  get  liquor,  I  suppose  ? 

A.  I  object  to  a  license  law  because  it  has  a  tendency  to  make  a  trade 
respectable  which  is  abominable ;  and  I  sec  no  necessity  for  a  license  law, 
because  provision  can  be  made  for  the  legitimate  sale  of  liquor  without  one  ; 
and  I  think  a  licensed  place,  if  the  sale  was  restricted  to  licensed  places  for 
the  general  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks,  is  a  nuisance  in  any  place.  Then,  in 
reference  to  the  prohibitory  law,  and  why  I  would  not  have  it  repealed,  I 
would  say,  in  the  first  place,  that  I  think  that  where  it  has  been  enforced  it 
has  prevented,  to  a  great  extent,  the  evils  which  result  from  intemperance. 
I  think  it  is  a  great  deal  better  to  enforce  it  than  it  would  be  to  repeal  it,  and 
I  think  it  will,  if  permitted  to  remain,  be  ultimately  enforced.  When  the 
Hon.  Mr.  Samuel  A.  Eliot,  who  was  very  much  opposed  to  the  prohibitory 
law,  was  called  to  testify  before  a  committee  of  the  Legislature,  and  was  asked 
whether  the  prohibitory  law  could  be  enforced,  he  answered,  with  some  indig- 
nation, "  Yes,  sir ;  though  it  should  take  all  the  bayonets  in  the  Commonwealth 
to  do  it."  I  should  object  to  the  alteration  of  the  law  because  it  has  been 
nullified  by  government  officers,  influential  citizens  and  liquor-dealers,  and  I 
think  that  the  Commonwealth  owes  it  to  its  dignity  to  carry  it  out  until  the 
people  submit  to  it.  If  a  law  which  has  been  upon  the  statute  book  for  fifteen 
years,  and  decided  to  be  constitutionally  right,  is  to  be  nullified  in  Massachu- 
setts, we  are  certainly  no  better  off  than  they  were  in  South  Carolina  in  1832. 
But  I  will  here  allude  to  the  first  temperance  convention  held  in  the  city  after 
this  law  was  enacted  in  1852.  I  think  it  was  in  the  month  of  November. 
There  was  a  very  large  convention  of  delegates  from  all  parts  of  the  State. 
It  was  held  in  the  Melodeon  in  the  daytime,  and  in  the  evening  Music  Hall 
was  packed  ;  and  the  spirit  of  that  convention  was  to  put  down  nullification, 


APPENDIX.  793 

and  then  to  put  down  the  liquor  traffic.  The  resolutions  and  speeches  were 
to  that  effect,  and  they  were  sustained  by  the  general  sentiment  of  the  con- 
vention. I  think,  sir,  that  this  spirit  of  nullification  in  the  city  of  Boston  is 
the  great  secret  why  the  citizens  of  Massachusetts  have  stood  by  this  law 
for  fifteen  years  without  flinching  and  with  the  determination  not  to  alter  a 
letter  or  a  comma  so  as  to  make  it  less  objectionable  to  liquor-sellers.  And 
when  government  officials,  liquor-sellers,  and  many  of  our  principal  citizens 
set  themselves  about  nullifying  the  law,  I  think  that  the  great  mass  of  the 
people  will  stand  by  it  until  all  is  blue. 

Q.     You  think  it  is  the  spirit  of  the  people  to  carry  out  this  law  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  almost  universally. 

Q,.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Do  you  know  of  any  instances  in  which  there 
has  been  such  a  legislation  in  Massachusetts  as  you  speak  of? 

A.     Well,  sir,  I  am  not  positive  on  that  point. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  instance  in  which  any  stringent  provision  which 
has  been  enacted  on  this  subject  has  been  altered  in  any  way  except  to  make 
it  more  stringent  ? 

A.  My  impression  has  been  that  it  has  never  been  necessary  in  Massa- 
chusetts. 

Q.     Then  that  does  not  apply  to  Massachusetts  '? 

A.     I  referred  more  particularly  to  New  York. 

Q.  In  the  history  of  legislation  has  there  ever  been  any  instance  in  which 
the  provisions  of  any  of  the  various  license  laws  were  modified  to  make  them 
less  effective  ? 

A.    I  cannot  recollect  one  at  this  moment. 

Q.     Then  that  part  of  your  opinion  is  not  applicable  ? 

A.     That  would  not  apply. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  is  less  intemperance  than  there  has  been,  and  that 
it  has  been  growing  less  for  the  last  fifteen  years  ? 

A.  I  said  that  so  far  as  my  observation  extended,  I  had  seen  less  of  the 
evils  of  intemperance. 

Q.  What  do  you  believe  to  be  the  fact  ?  Do  you  believe  that,  for  the  last 
fifteen  years,  taking  the  whole  period  together,  the  amount  of  intemperance 
has  been  diminished  in  Boston  ? 

A.  Well,  I  do  not  mean  to  state  that.  I  simply  meant  to  state  my  own 
observation.  I  stated  that  I  had  lived  in  the  country,  in  a  temperance  town, 
for  the  last  six  or  eight  years,  or  have  had  my  local  residence  there,  and  that 
I  had  not  been  called  to  the  city  so  much  ;  and  that  so  far  as  my  observation 
extended,  I  had  seen  less  intemperance,  and  had  been  led  to  hope  that  it  was 
really  less.  But  when  gentlemen  come  here,  who  have  opportunities  of  know- 
ing, and  state  that  it  is  greater,  I  am  quite  willing  to  allow  that  they  have 
better  means  of  knowing  than  I  have,  and  that  their  opinion  would  modify 
mine. 

Q.  Then  you  have  no  opinion  which  you  would  wish  the  Committee  to 
rely  upon  that  intemperance  has  diminished  ? 

A.    I  have  no  more  definite  opinion  than  I  have  stated. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  your  opinion  would  justify  the  Committee  in  going 
into  this  matter  and  assuming  that  intemperance  had  not  been  increasing  ? 
100 


794  APPENDIX 

A.     It  would  not. 

Q.  You  spoke  of  the  city  government  of  Boston  as  not  being  willing  and 
not  trying  to  enforce  the  present  law.  What  facts,  aside  from  this  paper,  have 
you  on  which  to  found  that  opinion  or  statement  which  you  made  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  think  the  annual  addresses  of  all  our  mayors,  if  studied,  will 
show  the  absence  of  all  disposition  to  enforce  the  liquor  law,  and  a  spirit  in 
favor  of  having  the  police  lenient  on  this  subject.  That  is  one  fact. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  after  this  law  took  effect,  complaints  were  made 
and  carried  into  court  until  the  courts  requested  the  city  government  to 
send  no  more  cases  there  ? 

A.     Well,  sir,  I  knew  that  such  a  request  had  been  made. 

Q.  Well,  what  could  the  city  government  do  ?  They  had  not  the  power 
to  punish,  and  only  to  make  the  complaint,  and  what  more  could  they  have 
done  than  they  did  do  ? 

A.  A  resolute  spirit  in  favor  of  sustaining  the  law  would  have  diminished 
very  much  the  number  of  sellers  and  prevented  complaints.  My  opinion  is, 
sir,  that  the  cases  that  were  carried  into  the  courts  for  the  first  few  years  after 
the  liquor  law  was  passed,  were  cases  made  up  and  carried  there  for  litigation, 
and  carried  there  expressly  for  the  purpose  of  retarding  the  enforcement  of 
the  law. 

Q.  Well,  that  is  rather  serious.  Have  you  any  facts  upon  which  to  base 
such  a  statement  ?  It  is  certainly  an  imputation  on  the  honor  and  fidelity  of 
the  City  Government- 

A.  Well,  sir;  I  was  about  the  City  Hall  a  great  deal  of  the  time  for 
several  years  after  the  law  was  passed,  and  there  was  an  atmosphere  entirely 
uncongenial  to  the  prohibitory  law,  and  the  violators  of  that  law  understood 
very  well  what  the  disposition  was. 

Q.  The  imputation  that  you  made  was  that  in  the  administration  of  their 
official  duties,  they  selected  such  cases  as  were  to  go  there  to  be  litigated  with  a 
view  to  retard  the  execution  of  the  law.  Now  have  you  any  other  facts  on 
which  to  base  that  statement,  than  those  which  you  have  stated  ?  You  have 
spoken  of  the  atmosphere  of  the  City  Hall  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  there  were  often  declarations  in  private  conversation,  (not  so 
much  in  debates),  and  the  members  of  the  City  Government  were  continually 
repeating  the  declaration  that  that  law  should  not  be  executed. 

Q.    Did  you  hear  any  of  these  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  repeatedly ;  and  I  recollect  one  instance  after  the  inaugura- 
tion of  Mayor  Bigelow.  He  assumed  in  his  inaugural  address  that  the  City 
Government  were  in  favor  of  a  license  law.  I  do  not  remember  the  exact 
phraseology,  but  the  expressions  were  true  in  fact,  but  such  as  he  had  no  right 
to  make,  committing .  the  whole  City  Government  in  favor  of  a  license  law 
and  against  a  prohibitory  law.  An  Order  was  made  referring  so  much  of  the 
Mayor's  address  as  related  to  the  license  law  to  a  joint  special  committee  in 
order  to  examine  the  facts.  It  brought  before  the  Council  the  whole  subject 
of  prohibitory  law  or  license  law,  and  was  debated  two  or  three  evenings ; 
but  the  Order  was  not  carried  in  the  Council.  There  was  a  memorial,  signed 
by  Stephen  Fairbanks  and  others,  asking  that  the  City  Government  should 
wipe  out  this  reproach  upon  the  city  of  Boston.  They  brought  the  subject  up 


APPENDIX.  795 

again,  and  the  Order  was  carried  in  the  Council,  and  sent  to  the  other  body, 
and  laid  upon  the  table  there  and  never  heard  of  afterwards. 

Q.  The  point  on  which  I  was  asking  you  was  that  there  was  a  want  of 
good  faith  on  the  part  of  the  City  Government  to  enforce  the  law ;  and  that 
prosecutions  were  made  with  a  view  of  preventing  the  enforcement  of  the  law. 
Do  you  suppose  that  gentlemen,  because  they  are  opposed  to  the  provisions  of 
a  law,  would  not  enforce  it  when  holding  official  positions  ? 

A.     I  do  not  mean  to  say  that. 

Q.  Well,  sir,  have  you  any  other  facts  than  what  you  have  already  stated, 
that  go  to  show  that  in  the  prosecutions  by  the  city  officers  there  was  a  want 
of  good  faith  and  a  design  to  defeat  rather  than  to  execute  the  law  ? 

A.     No,  sir ;  I  do  not  think  it  is  needful  to  state  any  other  facts. 

Q.  In  regard  to  this  paper  that  you  presented,  do  you  know  whether  it 
was  ever  passed  or  not  ? 

A.     No,  sir ;  but  I  know  that  it  sounded  natural. 

Q.     Do  you  know  that  the  Order  passed  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  there  was  an  Order  passed  instructing  the  police  to 
enter  prosecution  against  the  Tremont  House  bar  ? 

^4.  No,  sir ;  but  I  know  that  at  that  time  there  was  a  great  fear  that  the 
temperance  people  had  succeeded  in  electing  a  Mayor  and  Aldermen  who 
would  make  a  movement. 

Q.     But  as  upon  your  recollection  you  cannot  say  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Now,  could  not  such  a  document  have  been  introduced  by  a  single 
member  and  put  in  print  to  circulate  ? 

A.     It  is  the  report  of  a  committee,  sir,  is  it  not? 

Q.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  was  never  called  up  and  acted  upon  by  the  city 
government.  You  say  that  it  is  the  report  of  a  committee  ? 

Q.     (By  Mr.  PALMER.)     Does  it  not  appear  so  on  the  first  page  ? 

A.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     No,  sir. 

A.     Then  I  was  mistaken  as  to  that  fact. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  another  instance,  under  the  same  Mayor  and  Alder- 
men, that  an  Order  was  passed,  unanimously  or  nearly  so,  by  the  Board  of 
Aldermen,  not  to  allow  and  pay  any  bills  for  excursions  of  the  city  government 
where  liquors  were  used  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir.     That  did  not,  however,  pass  the  Board  of  Aldermen. 

Q.  Now,  then,  have  you  any  other  facts  that  justify  the  imputation  that 
you  make,  or  any  other  statement  as  to  this  want  of  fidelity  on  the  part  of  the 
city  officials  in  not  honestly  executing  the  law  ? 

A.     No  specific  facts. 

Q.     Or  general  idea  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  except  the  general  reception  that  temperance  people  met  with 
when  they  went  to  claim  the  sympathy  and  support  of  the  city  government  in 
their  efforts  to  have  the  law  executed. 

Q.  Can  you  conceive  anything  more  that  the  city  could  do  than  com- 
mencing and  sending  to  the  courts  the  prosecutions  which  they  have  sent  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 


796  APPENDIX. 

Q.     Well,  what  else  could  they  do  ? 

A.  I  think  they  ought  to  give  the  moral  support  of  the  government  to  the 
sustaining  of  the  law. 

Q.  What  moral  support  can  they  give  other  than  that  of  constant  arrests 
of  the  offenders,  and  sending  them  to  the  tribunals  where  they  are  to  be 
tried  ? 

A.  They  ought  to  do  it  willingly,  not  grudgingly.  They  ought  to  be  free 
to  do  it. 

Q.  Were  you  aware  that  the  prosecutions  which  were  sent  in  by  the  city 
government  were  very  numerous,  and  that  the  courts  were  clogged  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  I  am  aware  of  that,  and  what  I  mean  to  say  is,  that  if  the  city 
government  had  answered  the  question  as  Mayor  Eliot  did,  when,  although 
opposed  to  the  law,  he  said  that  it  should  be  executed  if  it  took  all  the  bayo- 
nets in  the  Commonwealth  to  do  it ;  if  they  had  taken  that  ground  and  had 
shown  that  spirit,  the  law  would  have  been  executed  to  a  much  greater  extent, 
at  least,  than  it  has  been  so  far  in  this  city. 

Q.  Is  it  not  true  to-day,  that  one  of  the  great  obstacles  in  the  way  of 
enforcing  the  present  law  in  Boston,  is  in  the  fact  that  it  has  not  the  sympathy 
ef  a  large  portion  of  the  community.  I  do  not  say  whether  it  is  a  majority  of 
the  community  or  not  ? 

A.  I  should  think,  sir,  that  one  great  obstacle  in  the  way  of  enforcing  the 
law,  is  that  the  men  to  whom  we  look  for  the  execution  of  the  law,  are  not  in 
sympathy  with  the  execution  of  that  law.  I  think  a  great  portion  of  the 
people  of  Boston,  who  are  desirous  that  the  law  should  be  executed,  are 
averse  to  taking  any  public  action  in  reference  to  its  enforcement.  Most  of 
our  temperance  people  are  of  that  class  who  would  rather  go  to  church  and 
prayer-meetings  than  to  police  courts. 

Q.  And  that  class  of  people  do  not  make  any  active  public  movement  in 
relation  to  it  ? 

A.     No,  sir,  not  actively. 

Q.  Is  not  that  one  of  the  great  sources  of  the  want  of  efficiency  in  regard 
to  this  law  ? 

A.     That  is  a  matter  of  opinion^ 

Q.     Is  it  not  your  opinion  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  think  that  if  the  people  would  act  upon  it  strongly,  it  would 
bring  about  a  better  state  of  public  sentiment. 

Q.  Now,  in  reference  to  dram-shops  and  hotels,  would  it  be  a  better  state 
of  things,  for  the  cause  of  temperance  and  for  the  morals  of  the  young  men 
of  Boston,  if  the  public  bars  should  be  closed  and  kept  closed,  and  if  there 
should  be  really  no  liquor  sold  by  the  glass,  though  public  houses  furnished  to 
their  guests,  with  their  meals,  as  much  liquor  as  they  might  call  for  ?  Would 
it  be  a  better  state  of  things  than  at  present  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  certainly  it  would. 

Q.  Would  it  not  be  a  great  difference  in  Boston  from  anything  we  have 
ever  had  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  the  public  bars  are  now  the  greatest  nuisance  we  have 
here,  and  if  they  should  be  abolished  it  would  be  so  much  clear  gain. 


APPENDIX.  797 

Q.  Then,  if  this  should  be  enforced,  so  far  as  Boston  is  concerned,  would  it 
not  be  a  gain  ?  I  assume  that  it  should  be  carried  out.  Would  it  not  be  a 
gain  over  anything  we  have  yet  had  ? 

A.     A  great  gain,  if  it  could  be  done. 

Q.  Would  it  be  more  so,  excluding  the  public  bars  and  having  the  hotels 
to  sell  to  their  guests  ?  Could  such  a  law  be  more  easily  enforced  than  the 
present  prohibitory  law  ? 

A .     I  think  it  could  be  more  easily  enforced  in  the  hotels. 

Q.  Then  in  regard  to  other  drinking  places,  except  in  connection  with  the 
hotels  in  Boston ;  if  they  were  all  closed,  and  kept  closed,  so  that  there  was 
no  drinking  in  houses  or  shops  or  bars,  would  not  that  be  a  very  great 
advance  from  anything  we  have  ever  had  ? 

A.     Very  great. 

Q.  And  if  that  could  be  done,  it  would  be  an  improvement  upon  the  pres- 
ent state  of  things,  in  your  opinion  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Mr.  Child  has  asked  you  whether  it  would  not 
be  an  improvement  on  the  present  state  of  things  if  you  should  shut  up  the 
public  bars  and  only  give  liquor  to  the  guests  of  hotels ;  but  would  it  not  be 
better  still  if  the  law  should  be  enforced  right  straight  through  ? 

A.  In  the  first  place,  I  have  no  faith  that  the  first  thing  could  be  done. 
I  think  the  evil  is  inseparable  in  the  two  cases. 

Q.  Speaking  about  the  efforts  of  the  city  to  enforce  the  law,  could  they 
not  have  used  the  seizure  clause  just  as  well  as  Major  Jones  ? 

A.     I  know  nothing  why  they  could  not. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  three  hundred  cases  in  one  year,  two  hundred  and 
eighty  the  next,  and  two  hundred  and  fifty-one  the  next,  show  any  disposition 
to  enforce  the  law  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  If  they  made  as  many  prosecutions  as  the  court 
could  try,  sitting  every  day  in  the  year,  could  they  do  any  more  ? 

A.    The  gentlemen  can  judge  as  well  as  myself. 

TESTIMONY  OF  H.  R.  STOKER,  M.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     You  are  a  resident  of  Boston  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Have  you  been  connected  with  any  medical  board  of  instruction  ? 

A .     For  three  years  I  was  an  instructor  in  the  Harvard  School  ? 

Q.  Your  present  relations  are  as  Professor  in  the  Berkshire  Medical 
College  ? 

A.     I  am  Professor  in  the  Berkshire  Medical  College. 

Q.  We  would  be  glad  to  have  you  make  such  observations  as  your  oppor- 
tunities for  observing  may  justify  you  in  making  in  regard  to  the  use  of  intox- 
icating liquors  and  their  effects  upon  the  human  system  ? 

A .  Well,  sir,  you  ask  two  or  three  questions  of  me  at  once,  and  each  is  a 
question  upon  which  medical  men  very  greatly  differ  among  themselves. 
Formerly  it  was  the  custom  of  physicians  very  largely  to  prescribe  alcohol, 
and,  like  the  rest  of  the  community,  to  consume  alcohol  freely  themselves. 


798  APPENDIX. 

Now-a-days  it  is  not  so  much  the  custom.  With  reference  to  its  effects  upon 
persons  in  health,  my  own  impression  is,  that  it  is  in  a  great  many  instances, 
at  any  rate,  and  even  in  moderate  amounts,  decidedly  injurious. 

Q.  Take  persons  in  average  health,  what  would  be  your  opinion,  speaking 
in  general  terms,  of  the  utility  of  alcoholic  beverages  ? 

A.     Certainly  that  they  would  be  unnecessary. 

Q.  Would  you  anticipate  deleterious  influences  if  daily  used,  and  in  such 
quantities  as  they  are  usually  consumed  by  men  who  are  called  habitual,  if 
not  intemperate  drinkers  ? 

A.  We  very  constantly  see  evil  effects  which  can  be  attributed  to  no  other 
source ;  perhaps  not  showing  themselves  at  all  until  after  some  years,  but 
concerning  whose  causation  there  can  be  no  doubt. 

Q.  Is  it  true  that  some  persons  in  whom  alcoholic  diseases  exist  are  cut  off 
by  other  diseases,  preventing  the  alcoholic  influences  from  fully  showing 
themselves  ? 

A.  When  a  man  has  in  any  way  become  affected  by  these  diseases,  of 
course  he  is  more  prone  to  feel  the  effect  of  any  acute  attack  whatever. 

Q.  Are  cases  which  might  properly  enough  be  attributed  to  the  use  of 
alcohol,  cases  where  death  is  reported  to  have  ensued  from  other  diseases  ? 

A.  Every  physician  who  has  examined  the  records  must  recognize  the  fact 
that  the  returns  made  by  physicians  are  generally  made  with  reference  to  the 
primary  cause  which  killed  the  patient.  The  physician  is  not  required  to  go 
into  the  patient's  general  state  and  habits  of  life. 

Q.  Is  it  a  fact  that  acute  diseases  often  determine  the  limit  of  life  in  case 
of  a  weakened  condition  of  the  system  through  the  influence  of  alcohol,  when 
the  patient  might  have  resisted  but  for  that  weakened  condition  ? 

A.     I  have  no  doubt  of  that  at  all. 

Q.  So  that  the  statistics  on  such  points,  however  carefully  kept,  would  not 
show  the  probable  amount  of  mortality  from  this  cause  ? 

A.  It  is  said  that  statistics  may  be  made  to  prove  both  sides  of  any  ques- 
tion. We  all  know  that  they  are  collected  from  different  sources,  with  differ- 
ent results,  and  from  very  different  stand-points,  and  under  entirely  different 
surroundings. 

Q.  Is  it  not  true  that  in  the  case  of  persons  who  have  used  moderately  or 
habitually  intoxicating  beverages,  even  the  lighter  beverages,  except  where 
the  symptoms  are  chronic  and  amount  to  disease,  which  are  believed  and 
confessed  to  be  attributable  to  the  long  influences  of  alcohol — is  it  not  true 
that  the  abandonment  of  these  beverages,  even  after  these  symptoms  appear, 
brings  restoration  ? 

A.  That  is  undoubtedly  true  in  many  cases;  but  oftentimes  the  sudden 
breaking  off  creates  a  certain  amount  of  disturbance. 

Q.     Is  that  believed  to  be  as  dangerous  as  the  continuance  of  the  habit  ? 

A.  In  many  cases  not,  sir;  and  in  other  cases  these  influences  can  be 
counteracted. 

Q.     You  have  been  conversant  with  the  work  of  Dr.  Day  ? 

A.  I  have  been  conversant  with  his  label's  to  some  extent.  And  I  regret 
that  his  modesty  should  have  prevented  him  from  stating  yesterday  the  fact 
of  having  been  appointed  to  the  superintendence  of  the  larger  establishment 
at  Binghamton,  New  York. 


APPENDIX.  799 

Q.  You  have  observed  the  late  publication  by  Dr.  Day,  entitled  Metho- 
mania,  treating  of  diseases  resulting  from  intemperance  ? 

A.  That  is  rather  a  home  thrust,  as  at  Dr.  Day's  solicitation  I  added  an 
appendix  to  that  work. 

Q.  You  made  some  remarks  on  the  influence  of  alcohol  upon  the  vital 
powers,  and  upon  the  quality  of  the  progeny  of  parents  who  used  alcoholic 
beverages  ? 

A.     I  did,  sir. 

Q.     Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  briefly  your  view  on  that  point  ? 

A.  I  remarked  the  fact  (for  I  recognize  it  as  a  fact,  and  received  as 
such  by  the  best  of  the  profession),  that  bad  habits  of  different  kinds,  that 
indulgences  in  vices  of  different  kinds,  tend  at  once  to  deteriorate  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  parent,  and  thereby  to  affect  the  offspring,  and  at  the  same  time 
to  establish  a  tendency  to  that  very  vice  and  that  very  indulgence  in  the 
child. 

Q.  In  relation  to  this  subject,  do  you  mean  to  say  that  it  deteriorates  the 
vigor  and  the  constitution  of  the  child,  and  not  of  the  child  only,  but  that  it 
also  tends  to  lessen  the  number  of  children. 

A.  The  lessening  of  the  number  of  children  is  at  present  a  problem  that 
is  exciting  a  great  deal  of  attention.  I  think  it  would  be  better  to  refer  you 
to  the  newspapers  of  the  day. 

Q.     Do  you  regard  it  as  the  chief  cause  ? 

A.     Certainly  not  the  only  one. 

Q.  Have  you  given  considerable  attention,  more  than  usual  attention,  to 
the  subject  of  decrease  of  population  and  hereditary  descent  ?  If  I  remem- 
ber right  you  read  a  paper  before  the  American  Medical  Association  on  that 
subject  V 

A.    I  did,  sir. 

Q.  In  relation  to  the  controversy  which  has  been  raging  for  the  last 
quarter  of  a  century  among  scientific  men,  as  to  the  question  whether  or  not 
alcohol  is  in  any  sense  food,  what  value  do  you  attach  to  that  question,  even 
if  it  be  decided  affirmatively  ?  That  is,  if  Liebig  be  sustained,  what  value 
has  that  as  bearing  upon  the  testimony  before  this  Committee  ? 

A.  The  question  is  a  very  important  one  in  a  scientific  point  of  view. 
Like  all  questions  in  organic  chemistry,  it  is  one  which  is  extremely  difficult 
to  settle  ;  and  like  all  questions  in  scientific  chemistry,  it  is  more  than  others 
yet  unsettled. 

Q.  But  if  decided  affirmatively,  would  you  regard  it  as  having  great  im- 
portance'practically  as  regards  the  objects  of  inquiry  before  this  Committee  ? 

A .  I  should  suppose  it  would  be  of  about  as  much  importance  as  the 
scientific  question  (which  would  probably  be  decided  in  the  affirmative,) 
whether  the  use  of  arsenic,  as  it  is  employed  by  the  peasants  in  Styria,  under 
certain  circumstances  and  in  certain  quantities,  is  not  only  not  productive  of  any 
immediate  injury,  but  makes  a  person  to  appear  to  be  in  a  better  condition 
of  health.  It  is  stated  that  arsenic  can  be  taken  for  a  long  period  of  time, 
and  in  enormous  doses  with  apparent  benefit  to  the  health.  But  I  suppose 
it  would  hardly  be  considered  proper  to  introduce  the  general  use  of  it 
among  our  own  population. 


800  APPENDIX. 

Q.  But  you  would  not  grant  an  affirmative  judgment  on  this  question  ? 
You  would  not  think  of  ranging  arsenic  among  the  articles  of  food  ? 

A.     I  should  not. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  spoke  of  the  statistics  not  being  very  reliable. 
I  agree  with  you  entirely.  Do  you  include  that  class  of  statistics  in  which 
scientific  gentlemen  have  made  examinations  and  records  of  a  great  variety  of 
cases  during  a  period  of  years,  and  then  from  these  actual  examinations  have 
drawn  their  conclusions  and  given  the  statistics  from  which  they  were  derived. 
You  do  not  include  those,  do  you  ? 

A.  I  certainly  do.  And  I  would  compare  the  case  to  that  of  the  analysis 
of  ores,  at  the  present  time  where  this  will  be  found  to  be  true.  You  might 
take  certain  specimens  and  submit  them  to  different  chemists,  and  put  them 
upon  their  oath,  and  they  will  give  you  entirely  different  results. 

Q.     Then  these  are  not  reliable  ? 

A.     They  are  not  absolutely  reliable. 

Q.     As  to  the  State  assaying  or  anything  else  ? 

A.     I  make  no  exception,  sir. 

.  Q.  You  spoke  of  the  number  of  children  being  less,  owing  to  this  influence. 
Have  you  noticed  the  fact  that  the  number  of  births  among  the  foreign  popu- 
lation is  greater  than  that  among  the  native  population  ? 

A.     So  far  as  I  am  aware,  I  was  the  first  man  to  point  out  that  fact. 

Q.     That  is  a  fact  ? 

A.    I  have  no  doubt  at  all  of  it. 

Q.  That  the  number  of  births  among  the  foreign  population  in  this  country 
is  much  greater,  in  proportion  to  the  population,  than  that  among  the  American 
population  ? 

A.     There  is  no  doubt  of  it. 

Q.  Is  it  not  a  fact  that  among  the  foreign  population  there  is  more 
intemperance  ? 

A.     I  have  no  doubt  of  it. 

Q.     Notwithstanding  ? 

A.  If  you  will  allow  me,  I  will  give  an  explanation,  perhaps  satisfactory 
The  Catholic  Church  makes  it  penal  for  her  people,  either  before  or  after 
birth,  to  destroy  their  children,  while  our  own  churches  do  not.  And  that  is  a 
fact  which  affords,  sufficient  explanation. 

Q.  Are  there  other  causes  which  influence  the  number  and  health  of  the 
children  ? 

A.    I  said  that  intemperance  is  considered  but  one  of  the  causes. 

Q.     Is  it  the  most  important,  or  least  important,  or  half  way  ? 

A.     It  is  quite  an  important  cause. 

Q.     Does  the  use  of  opium  and  things  of  that  kind  have  the  same  tendency  ? 

A .  I  think  not,  sir.  They  may,  perhaps,  have  a  certain  tendency  in  that 
direction,  but  they  certainly  do  not  affect  the  system  in  the  same  extreme. 

Q.  You  speak  of  the  deleterious  character  and  effect  of  stimulants  admin- 
istered by  phyiscians,  etc.  The  scientific  and  medical  faculty  are  divided  in 
opinion,  are  they  not  ? 

A.    They  are,  sir. 


APPENDIX.  801 

Q.  If  the  Legislature  desired  a  fact  on  which  to  base  a  criminal  law,  is 
there  a  sufficiently  united  opinion  on  that  point  to  make  it  safe  to  take  it  as  a 
settled  fact  preparatory  to  making  a  law  ? 

A.  I  should  think  the  mere  question  as  to  whether  alcohol  was  an  article 
of  food,  or  whether  it  acted  in  one  way  or  another,  was  too  incidental  to  affect 
the  decision. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  FAY.)  You  speak  of  alcohol  as  a  medicine.  Do  you  think 
the  results  sought  by  the  use  of  liquor  in  pulmonary  diseases  can  be  gained  as 
well  by  any  other  medicine  ? 

A.  That  is  a  very  difficult  question  to  answer.  The  cure  of  pulmonary 
disease  is  a  point  not  as  yet  obtained.  We  are  empirical  in  treating  that 
class  of  diseases.  We  try  one  thing,  and  then  another ;  and  we  may  lengthen 
life  by  some  agents,  but  not  absolutely  .save  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Is  it  not  common  to  prescribe  alcoholic  preparations 
or  the  sake  of  the  fusel  oil  which  is  contained,  for  instance,  in  whiskey  ? 

A.  Certainly,  but  the  effect  is  a  pharmaceutical  question,  which  I  have 
not  investigated. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Have  you  any  other  statement  which  you  desire  to 
make? 

A.  I  have  only  a  word  to  add.  I  think  that  altogether  too  much  impor- 
tance is  laid  on  this  medical  question  as  to  the  exact  end  or  result  of  the 
introduction  of  alcohol  into  the  human  economy.  As  you  have  seen,  medical 
men  differ  among  themselves.  Reliable  observers  state  as  the  result  of  their 
observation,  that  while  alcohol  may  perhaps  be  of  use  and  may  fulfil  certain 
indications ;  still  that  it  does  not  necessarily  follow  that  that  is  constantly  the 
case,  nor  could  it  fulfil  any  end  not  otherwise  obtainable,  if  it  were  so.  In  a 
conversation  which  I  had  last  evening  with  Professor  Lombard,  of  Harvard 
College — a  gentleman  of  considerable  standing  in  proportion  to  his  years — he 
stated  that  in  his  estimation  (he  having  given  special  attention  to  this  matter 
of  chemical  physiology),  the  question  is  entirely  unsettled.  And  that  Prof. 
Lombard's  statement  might  weigh  more,  I  have  brought  a  copy  of  a  paper 
which  he  published  in  the  "  New  York  Medical  Journal  "Tor  June,  1865,  on 
the  influence  of  alcohol  on  the:  animal  temperature.  Prof.  Lombard  takes  the 
ground  that  alcohol  does  raise  the  animal  temperature.  He  states  as  follows  : 

"  I  am  well  aware  that  the  advocates  of  total  abstinence  have  tried  desper- 
ately to  prove  that  even  small  quantities  of  alcohol  lessen  the  power  of 
resisting  a  reduced  temperature.  But  the  proofs  to  the  contrary  are  just  as 
numerous  and  as  weighty. 

"  This  article  must  not,  however,  be  construed  as  a  defence  of  the  habitual 
use  of  intoxicating  liquors,  which  is  the  usual  lot  of  such  articles.  On  the 
contrary,  I  am  far  from  advocating  any  such  anti-temperance  doctrine,  but  at 
the  same  time  consider  it  equally  unreasonable  to  indulge  in  a  fanatical 
crusade  against  the  use  of  alcohol  in  all  forms  and  on  all  occasions,  as  Dr. 
Carpenter,  Professor  Miller  and  others  have  done." 

Now,  as  I  understand  it,  the  position  of  the  medical  profession  at  large  is 

that,  under  certain  circumstances  and  in  some  forms,  alcohol  may  be  of 

advantage.     But  I  do  protest  against  such  opinions  being  advanced  as  that 

people  can  prescribe  it  for  themselves  whenever  they  choose.     I  will  refer  to 

101 


802  APPENDIX. 

another  matter,  which  is  incidental  to  the  main  question,  and  will  read  from  a 
paper,  the  more  interesting  in  this  connection  from  the  fact  that  it  is  prefaced 
by  a  strong  endorsement  by  Governor  Andrew.  It  is  a  report  by  the  State 
Commission  on  Insanity,  of  1863  and  1864,  of  which  I  had  the  honor  of  being 
a  member.  This  report  shows  by  reasoning  which  has  not  and  never  can  be 
answered,  that  it  was  for  the  interest  of  the  Commonwealth  to  cure  insanity 
wherever  it  could  cure  it,  and  prevent  it  wherever  it  could  prevent  it.  And 
I  contend  that  the  arguments  there  used  apply  precisely,  and  word  for  word, 
to  the  case  of  inebriates,  whether  they  are  habitual  drinkers  or  whether  they 
are  confirmed  drunkards.  This  is  Senate  Document  72  of  the  session  of  1864. 
The  report  presents  statements  which  prove  conclusively  the  pecuniary  worth 
of  each  individual  as  a  laborer  to  the  community. 

With  regard  to  the  manner  in  which  alcohol  is  used  by  physicians,  they 
differ.  It  was  formerly  used  constantly  ;  now  it  is  used  less.  It  is  now  the 
common  practice  to  use  aqueous  extracts,  and  so  to  avoid  the  use  of  alcohol. 
My  own  practice  is  no  exception  to  this  rule.  Dr.  James  Jackson  is  very 
much  respected  by  me  ;  but  it  must  be  remembered  that  in  his  time  it  was  the 
custom  to  treat  disease,  to  a  great  extent,  by  prescribing  alcoholic  tinctures, 
and  it  is  possible  that  his  statement  may  have  been,  to  a  certain  extent,  owing 
to  the  acknowledged  forgetfulness  of  old  age.  Formerly  it  was  considered 
always  necessary,  when  a  woman  was  confined,  to  administer  some  alcoholic 
preparation  after  the  labor  was  completed  ;  and  it  was  always  customary  to 
give  the  physician  his  dram,  too.  It  was  formerly  considered  necessary  after 
surgical  operations  to  administer  alcoholic  stimulants.  That  custom  is  lapsing. 
As  an  instance  in  proof  of  this  assertion,  I  may  mention  that,  only  last  week, 
the  "  Philadelphia  Medical  and  Surgical  Reporter  "  gave  an  article  from  the 
present  Superintendent  of  the  Naval  Hospital  at  Chelsea,  Dr.  Coues,  in 
which  it  is  stated  distinctly  with  reference  to  this  point,  that  ordinary  food  is 
infinitely  better  after  such  operations,  and  in  many  forms  of  disease,  than  the 
special  food  which  we  are  now  discussing.  My  own  belief  is,  that  the  ques- 
tion before  you,  gentlemen,  to  decide,  is  a  question,  not  whether  we  are  to 
permit  a  certain  branch  of  trade  to  prosper,  not  whether  we  are  to  afford 
facilities  for  gentlemen  to  dilute  our  Cochituate,  when  they  come  from  the 
West  where  the  water  requires  enforcement,  not  whether  we  arc  to  prevent 
men  from  a  slow  process  of  suicide,  but  to  protect  ourselves.  And  any  man 
who  has  made  any  extended  examination  of  our  almshouses,  as  it  has  been  my 
own  unpleasant  duty  to  do,  who  has  looked  into  the  causes  of  insanity,  who  has 
visited  among  the  poor,  and  heard  the  complaints  of  widows  and  orphans,  and 
frequently  the  agonizing  expression  of  the  drunkard  himself  (no  matter  if 
even  lie  be  but  a  moderate  drinker),  must  sec  the  necessity  for  some  remedy 
for  this  evil.  I  myself  am  not  a  total  abstainer.  I  do  sometimes  take  a  glass 
of  wine  with  a  friend.  I  do  not  approve  of  it.  But  we  are  all  mortal.  I 
think,  however,  that  there  is  no  one  who  would  not  desire  that  the  present 
law  should  have  a  fair  trial,  and  who  would  not  believe  that  the  law  could  be 
enforced  even  in  Boston. 

Q.  .(By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  speak,  sir,  of  the  opinions  and  facts  in  regard 
to  these  matters  being  so  exceedingly  unsettled  that  they  are  not  in  a  condi- 
tion to  "be  made  the  basis  of  legislation  ? 


APPENDIX.  803 

A.     I  think  that  in  many  respects  they  are. 

Q.     As  a  whole  ? 

A.  As  regards  this  very  point  that  you  referred  to  a  short  time  ago,  I 
myself  have  the  belief  that  there  are  points  upon  which  the  Legislature  cannot 
have  much  occasion  to  base  there  action. 

Q.  The  idea  that  I  meant  was,  that  whenever  you  are  to  establish  and 
make  a  basis  of  legislation  upon  certain  facts  and  usages,  to  prohibit  any  par- 
ticular custom  by  criminal  prosecution,  is  the  opinion  of  medical  gentlemen  to 
bear  uniformly  ?  Would  you  consider  these  opinions  strong  enough  in  these 
respects  to  make  the  non-observance  of  the  law  a  sin,  and  send  the  man  who 
does  not  observe  it  to  the  House  of  Correction  ? 

A.  In  these  matters,  medical  men  have  partially  taken  their  position  from 
their  understanding  of  the  law.  Now,  as  I  understand  it,  the  law  formerly 
considered  a  man  who  committed  a  crime  under  the  influence  of  liquor  as 
blameworthy  on  the  ground  that  he  was  voluntarius  demon,  and  punished  him 
more  severely.  Now-a-days,  if  a  man  commit  that  crime  under  the  influence 
of  liquor,  his  counsel  endeavors  that  this  shall  be  considered  as  an  excuse,  and 
that  the  man's  crime  shall  be  treated  more  leniently,  whereas  if  he  has  drank 
so  much  as  to  have  the  delirium  tremens,  it  is  thought  that  Almighty  God  has 
so  severely  dealt  with  him  that  human  law  ought  not  to  interfere.  I  think  the 
medical  profession  take  their  views  partly  from  these  doctrines.  I  think  many 
of  the  questions  which  are  dwelt  upon  here  are  side  issues,  which  go  to 
strengthen  the  views  of  the  people  of  the  State.  These  side  issues  should  not 
be  considered  fit  to  outweigh  others  that  they  serve  undoubtedly  to  show  the 
skill  and  eloquence  (certainly  yesterday)  of  counsel ;  but  that  they  serve  only 
to  throw  dust  in  the  eyes. 

Q.     You  say  that  the  present  law  is  not  enforced  ? 

A.     The  present  law  seems  to  be  enforced  pretty  rapidly. 

Q.     Do  you  know  of  any  places  where  the  sale  of  liquor  has  been  stopped  ? 

A.  The  only  case  that  I  know  of  was  one  that  I  saw  the  other  day  in 
Bromfield  Street,  where  I  happened  to  see  them  pouring  out  the  liquor. 

Q.     You  assume  that  in  this  place  the  sale  was  actually  stopped  ? 

A .  I  am  not  at  all  sure  about  that  matter.  I  know  this  fact,  however. 
Night  before  last  I  happened  to  be  in  conversation  with  Dr.  Day.  His  Wash- 
ingtonian  Home  is  in  the  neighborhood  of  a  number  of  bar-rooms,  and  it  has 
been  a  very  noisy  region  ;  so  much  so  that  it  has  disturbed  the  residents  there. 
But  Dr.  Day  states  that  of  late  there  has  been  peace  and  quiet  and  less  noise 
in  the  streets  than  ever  before  during  his  connection  with  the  establishment. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  The  declaration  was  made  yesterday  by  the  learned 
counsel  who  is  not  present  to-day,  that  formerly  physicians  prescribed  alcohol 
too  much,  and  they  now  prescribe  it  too  little.  Is  that  view  correct  ? 

A.  I  think  there  is  a  certain  amount  of  truth  on  both  sides.  Physicians 
formerly  used  to  bleed  very  often.  That  practice  is  not  so  common  of  late. 
It  is  partly  a  matter  of  fashion,  and  it  is  partly  a  matter  of  the  change  in  the 
type  of  the  diseases,  which  we  all  acknowledge.  I  think  it  is  well  enough  to 
leave  it  to  the  physicians. 


804  APPENDIX. 

TESTIMONY  OF  KEY.  GILBERT  HAVEN. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  are  editor  of  "  Zion's  Herald,"  I  believe,  at 
present  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  I  want  to  ask  you  about  your  observations  in  foreign  travel.  What 
parts  of  Europe  have  you  travelled  in  ? 

A.  I  have  travelled  through  England,  Scotland,  France,  Germany,  Italy 
and  Greece. 

Q.  Do  you  know,  from  your  own^  observation,  whether  wine  is  generally 
drank  by  the  people  in  Southern  France  and  in  Italy  ? 

A.  I  did  not  visit  Southern  France,  but  in  France,  Italy,  and  Switzerland 
it  is  the  common  beverage. 

Q.     Among  the  poorer  people  ? 

A.  I  should  hardly  say  the  poorer  people.  I  should  say  that  coffee  was 
more  commonly  drank  in  France  and  Switzerland  among  the  poorer  classes- 
It  is  the  beverage  of  the  common  people.  I  saw  drunkenness  in  every  part  of 
Germany,  and  I  saw  drunkenness  in  France  and  Italy  and  on  the  Rhine.  My 
landlord,  at  Assmanhausen,  where  I  stopped,  a  few  miles  from  Johannisberg, 
was  himself  what  I  called  drunk.  He  certainly  had  very  little  command  over 
himself. 

Q.     Did  you  see  any  others  who  were  drunk  ? 

A.  I  saw  a  French  officer  fall  drunk  in  the  streets  of  Rome.  I  saw  some 
men  in  Munich  drunk  on  beer.  I  suppose  that  was  partly  because  they 
oould  not  get  anything  else. 

Q.    Did  you  see  many  ? 

A.  Not  so  many  as  I  have  seen  in  New  York  and  Boston.  The  habits  of 
people  arising  from  drunkenness  have  been  exceedingly  troublesome.  In  their 
whole  character  they  are  low  and  coarse.  I  saw  the  effects  of  them  to  sonic 
extent.  People  would  sit,  as  they  used  to  around  our  own  taverns  years  ago, 
and  sit  until  midnight,  and  in  a  state  of  semi-intoxication. 

Q.    How  large  a  number  were  there  of  these  ? 

A.  I  should  say  that  it  was  a  very  general  sight.  I  never  went  to  the 
country  taverns  where  there  were  not  these  guzzlers  around  them,  on  Sundays 
and  holidays,  and  even  late  at  night.  This  is  a  custom  which  prevails  among 
the  peasantry. 

Q.  Take  the  peasantry  in  Manchester,  and  in  other  large  cities  in  Eng- 
land— their  drink  is  heavier  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Are  they  not  a  largely  brutalized  people  ? 

A.  They  are,  sir ;  no  other  more  so  that  I  have  ever  met  in  all  my  jour- 
ney ings. 

Q.  Have  you  heard  it  stated  that  with  those  who  drink  strong  liquors,  if 
they  meet  with  a  cut  or  wound,  it  is  almost  impossible  to  cure  them  ? 

A.  I  have  heard  that  statement  from  what  I  supposed  to  be  good  author- 
ity. I  could  not  say  anything  further  than  that  statement.  I  might  say  that 
I  met  with  quite  a  number  of  temperance  gentlemen  in  England  and  Scot- 
land, who  said  that  if  their  people  could  be  raised  up  from  this  habit,  they 
could  be  raised  up  more  effectually  in  every  other  respect ;  and  that  measures 
were  being  urged  in  this  direction,  and  that  they  looked  to  us  and  to  Massa- 


APPENDIX.  805 

chusetts  men  for  the  standard  by  winch  they  were  endeavoring  to  raise  up 
their  own  population. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  If  I  understand  you  rightly,  there  is  far  less  intem- 
perance there  than  in  Boston  and  New  York  ? 

A .  I  said  that  I  did  not  see  so  many  in  these  places  as  I  did  in  Boston  and 
New  York. 

Q.  Did  you  express  the  opinion  that  drunkenness  in  the  wine-growing 
countries  of  France,  among  the  same  class  of  people,  was  as  great  ? 

A.  As  far  as  my  observation  would  go,  it  was  quite  as  great ;  and  the  effect 
upon  the  population  was  worse,  because  it  was  more  general. 

Q.     Then  drunkenness  in  the  streets  of  Paris  was  very  common  ? 

A.     Not  reeling  drunkenness. 

Q.     But  you  saw  more  intoxication  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  did  not  say  that  I  saw  any  more  than  I  said  I  had  seen  in 
New  York. 

Q.     Do  you  mean  to  say  that  you  saw  intoxicated  persons  in  Paris  ? 

A.     I  said  I  saw  them  in  Munich. 

Q.     Do  you  recollect  any  other  cases  of  intoxication  ? 

A .     I  remember  cases  of  persons  who  were  drunk  on  beer. 

Q.     Do  you  recollect  any  other  instances  in  this  locality  ? 

A .     I  spoke  of  three  instances. 

Q.  Do  you  recollect  any  other  instances  than  these  three,  where  they  were 
really  intoxicated  and  fell  down  ? 

A.  I  do  not  remember  now  of  their  falling  down.  I  recollect  many  cases 
of  what  I  called  intoxication.  I  do  not  remember  now  of  seeing  more  than 
three  that  fell  in  the  streets. 

TESTIMONY  OF  PROF.  HENRY  G.  CAREY. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  are  a  teacher  of  music  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Your  residence  ? 

A .    Maiden. 

Q.     "Will  you  state  your  observation  abroad  in  reference  to  intoxication  ? 

A.  My  testimony  will  have  to  be  short  as  my  experience.  I  made  a  flying 
trip  through  Europe  last  summer,  spending  some  five  months.  I  cannot  say 
that  I  noticed  any  cases  of  intoxication  in  wine-growing  countries,  except  in 
Switzerland.  I  saw  it  in  England  and  Scotland  and  in  Switzerland,  where  I 
had  the  most  opportunity  for  observing.  I  attended  a  musical  festival  at 
Lausanne,  and  we  took  an  excursion  on  the  lake.  There  was  a  large  quantity 
of  this  white  wine,  as  you  would  call  it,  drank  ;  and  I  saw  no  other  kind  of 
liquor  there.  Before  night  there  was  a  large  proportion  of  the  persons  on 
board  who  were  drunk,  and  a  great  many  of  them  dead  drunk,  quite  a  number 
of  them  fighting  drunk,  and  more  of  them  rcelingly  drunk. 

Q.     Some  of  them  mellow  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  I  think  it  must  have  been  upon  the  wine.  I  tasted  of  it  to 
see  what  it  was.  It  could  not  have  been  anything  but  the  wine ;  for  there 
was  no  other  kind  of  liquor  there. 


806  APPENDIX. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     They  were  nearly  all  musicians  ? 
A .     Yes,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  or  E.  L.  MITCHELL. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)     What  is  your  residence  ? 

A.    Boston. 

Q.  Have  you  at  any  period  travelled  abroad  and  if  so  will  you  state  the 
results  of  your  observation  bearing  on  the  question  of  inebriety  ? 

A.  I  have  travelled  in  France  and  Switzerland  and  part  of  Germany, 
but  my  visits  to  other  parts  of  Europe  besides  France,  were  very  short.  I 
resided  in  Paris  two  years  and  I  have  paid  four  or  five  visits  there  besides. 

Q.     How  long  ago  was  your  residence  in  Paris  ? 

A.     About  fourteen  years  ago. 

Q.     When  was  your  last  visit  to  Paris  ? 

A.    My  last  visit  to  Paris  was  about  thirteen  years  ago. 

Q.  Did  you  observe  any  facts  that  bear  upon  the  question  of  the  use  of 
light  wines  in  preventing  drunkenness  or  the  evil  effects  of  alcoholic  bever- 
ages ? 

A.  1  had  always  been  told  before  I  went  to  Paris  that  drunkenness  was 
not  at  all  prevalent  there ;  that  the  French  were  not  a  drunken  people,  and 
I  supposed  I  should  never  see  anything  of  drunkenness  in  that  city.  I  recol- 
lect very  well  that  the  first  morning  after  I  reached  Paris,  after  leaving  my 
hotel,  the  first  thing  which  I  saw  was  a  drunken  woman.  I  should  not, 
probably,  have  noticed  the  fact  had  I  not  been  led  to  suppose  that  I  should 
not  find  drunkenness  there  at  all.  I  was  employed  at  that  time,  on  the 
English  paper  called  GaliynanVs  Messenger,  and  in  the  office  of  that  paper 
were  eight  Frenchmen ;  and  two  out  of  that  eight  were  habitual  drunkards. 
They  were  on  the  average  drunk  once  a  fortnight,  both  of  them,  and  unable 
to  do  their  business.  I  have  visited  with  these  men  the  barriers  outside  of 
Paris  (all  understand  what  the  barriers  are),  and  there  I  have  seen  a  great 
amount  of  drunkenness  on  festival  occasions.  The  drink  was  principally 
poor  wine  and  bad  brandy. 

Q.  By  using  those  adjectives  you  do  not  mean  to  eulogize  any  wines 
particularly  ? 

A.    No,  sir  ;  I  mean  by  that  adulterated  wine  and  brandy. 

Q.  The  population  of  Paris  in  large  numbers  go  outside  of  the  walls  on 
holidays  and  on  Sundays  ? 

A.     The  working  people  do. 

Q.    Is  drinking  more  prevalent  outside  of  the  city  than  in  ? 

A .    Yes,  sir ;  because  it  is  cheaper. 

Q.  Are  you  able  to  state  the  relative  excess  of  liquors  outside  the  walls 
and  within  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  I  can  scarcely  recollect  at  this  present  time.  I  know  you 
could  buy  wine  as  low  as  six  sous  a  litre,  which  is  a  little  less  than  six  cents. 
It  would  be  about  six  cents  a  quart.  I  have  heard  it  stated  that  beefsteaks 
would  be  some  two  or  three  cents  higher  per  pound  in  coming  into  the  city. 
It  is  not  altogether  to  get  cheap  liquors  that  the  mechanics  go  outside  the 


APPENDIX.  S07 

barriers ;   it  is  because  there  are  a  good  many  restaurateurs  and  they  sell 
cheaper ;  and  there  are  a  great  many  gardens  where  people  go. 

Q.     Are  there  not  amusements  and  entertainments  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

..     Q.     And  are  these  not  arranged  so  that  the  visitors  are  seated  and  call  for 
1  their  wines  at  the  tables  during  the  performances  ? 

>    A.    Most  of  the  amusement-gardens  are  outside  of  the  barriers . 

These  are  the  principal  amusements. 

Q.     The  "  Punch  and  Judy,"  is  that  found  there  ? 

A.  That  is  met  with  more  in  England;  not  so  much  in  France.  There 
are  cafes  within  the  city  which  are  arranged  so  that  you  can  go  in  and  sit 
down  and  have  your  small  glass  of  brandy ;  and  there  is  generally  an  orchestra 
there  where  musicians  play. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOLER.)  Arc  there  some  sort  of  theatrical  performances 
there  ? 

A.     Yet,  sir;  something  of  that  class. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     At  what  time  were  you  at  Paris  two  years  ? 

A.     About  fifteen  years  ago. 

Q.  You  speak  of  what  you  saw  outside  on  these  holidays.  It  has  been 
stated  here  that  the  streets  of  Paris  are  very  quiet  on  Sundays.  Do  you 
agree  with  that  ? 

A.    In  the  city  itself?     Yes,  sir,  it  is  quite  as  quiet. 

Q.     Any  drunkenness  ? 

A.     That  is  not  my  experience. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  WILLIAM  F.  WARREN,  D.  D. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  state  to  the  Com- 
mittee the  result  of  your  observations  abroad  as  bearing  on  this  question  of 
drunkenness  ? 

A.  My  first  residence  in  Europe  was  in  the  years  1856,  1857,  1858, 
parts  of  these  years — something  over  two  years.  My  next  residence  com- 
menced in  1861,  and  continued  something  over  five  years.  I  returned  last 
summer.  I  resided,  for  the  most  part,  in  Germany.  I  travelled,  however, 
over  a  large  part  of  Europe  and  visited  the  wine-growing  countries,  residing 
for  some  time — for  several  months — in  these  countries.  My  impression  is,  that 
between  the  two  regions,  the  wine-drinking  populations  and  the  beer-drinking 
populations,  there  is  very  little  difference.  As  regards  that  class  with  whom 
I  was  thrown  into  a  more  immediate  contact  during  a  part  of  my  first  resi- 
dence, the  result  of  my  observation  was,  that  there  was  double  the  amount  of 
drinking  and  of  drunkenness  among  the  students  that  there  is  among  the 
same  class  in  this  country.  As  regards  the  people,  I  can  only  say  that  during 
the  last  five  years,  drunken  people  have  gone  past  my  house,  I  suppose,  every 
evening,  sometimes  boisterously  drunk  and  sometimes  reelingly  drunk.  In  a 
street,  but  a  few  rods  from  where  I  lived,  there  were  brawls  almost  every  Sun- 
day afternoon.  Not  only  was  beer  drank  freely,  but  stronger  liquors.  The 
seamstress  who  was  largely  employed  in  this  neighborhood,  and  who  also 
worked  for  us,  had  a  drunken  father  and  he  was  exceedingly  poor,  and  she  had 
been  brought  up  in  the  practice  of  this  vice.  The  woman  who  used  to  come 


808  APPENDIX. 

and  do  house-cleaning  and  washing  at  times,  had  a  drunken  husband  who  was 
an  habitual  drinker,  and  I  have  no  reason  to  think  that  this  state  of  things  was 
any  worse  in  this  neighborhood  than  in  other  parts  of  the  city  or  country. 

Q.     What  city  was  that  ? 

A.     In  Bremen. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  The  remark  which  you  make  touching  the  students 
applies  to  the  students  in  the  University  at  Bremen. 

A.  There  is  no  university  at  Bremen.  The  universities  where  I  studied 
were  at  Berlin  and  Halle.  I  have  also  visited  other  towns,  and  know  some- 
thing of  the  state  of  things  generally,  in  this  respect. 

Q.     You  suppose  the  habit  to  be  pretty  uniform  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  there  are,  it  is  well  known,  associations  of  students  called 
"  corps,"  and  I  suppose  one-third  of  the  members  of  these  "  corps  "  ordinarily 
are  in  such  a  state  once  a  week  as  to  be  unable  ta  walk  straight  and  to 
behave  themselves  upon  the  street. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  How  large  a  portion  of  all  the  students  of  these 
"  corps"  are  given  to  this  habit? 

A.     Much  the  larger  part. 

Q.  Then  in  the  institutions  there,  one-third  of  the  students  are  once  a 
week  what  you  would  call  drunk  ? 

A .     Worse  for  liquor,  certainly. 

Q.     That  is  universally  so  ? 

A.     So  far  as  my  observation  extends. 

Q.     In  the  universities  of  Halle  and  Berlin  V 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     What  number  of  students  are  there  there  ? 

A.     At  Berlin  there  are  two  thousand  or  over.     In  Halle,  about  a  thousand. 

Q.     What  arc  these,  American  or  German  ? 

A.     German. 

Q.  The  statement,  if  I  understand  it,  is,  that  the  greater  portion  of  these 
three  thousand  students  are  drunk  every  week  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  said  that  a  greater  portion  belong  to  these  "  corps,"  and  of 
these  "  corps,"  one-third  were  every  week  worse  for  liquor. 

Q.    Have  you  noticed  any  intemperance  anything  like  that  elsewhere  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.     What  is  the  article  that  they  get  drunk  upon  ? 

A.     They  drink  beer  more  than  anything  else,  and  also  the  wines  and 
stronger  liquors. 
•  Q.     Did  you  make  any  observation  in  Paris  ? 

A.     My  observation  was  brief  and  some  years  ago. 

Q.  Did  you  make  any  observation  in  any  of  the  wine-growing  countries  or 
in  the  south  of  France  V 

A.  I  am  better  acquainted  with  the  south  of  Germany,  though  I  have 
visited  other  places  on  holidays.  I  have  found  that  drunkenness  was  an  inva- 
riable concomitant  of  their  festivals. 

Q.     Did  they  get  drunk  so  as  to  fall  in  the  streets  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     What  number  ? 


APPENDIX.  809 

A.     I  am  unablo  to  state. 

Q.  In  the  assembly,  on  the  holidays,  how  many  do'you  suppose  you  would 
see  intoxicated  ? 

A.  I  think  it  would  vary  a  great  deal  with  the  occasion,  and  with  different 
persons.  Some  would  see  more  and  some  less  ;  but  I  suppose  that  one-tenth 
part  or  more, — in  fact  I  may  say  one-fifth  part,  aro  in  an  exhilarated  state. 

Q.     Well,  a  Frenchman  is  always  in  an  exhilarated  state. 
v  A.     Yes,  sir ;  but  I  have  seen  some  that  are  not. 

Q.  What  do  you  mean  by  an  exhilarated  state  ?  That  people  could  not 
walk,  or  that  they  wanted  to  fight,  or  that,  like  the  French,  they  were  giddy 
and  exhilarated  ? 

A.  I  suppose  the  effects  of  liquor  are  different  upon  different  tempera- 
ments ;  but  I  have  known  people  unwilling  to  go  certain  roads  in  the  south 
of  Germany,  because  of  the  numbers  of  drunken  people  that  were  swaggering 
about.  I  speak  now  of  the  wine-growing  countries  of  Germany. 

Q.  When  these  men  were  reeling  and  swaggering  in  the  streets,  were  they 
called  drunk,  or  were  they  able  to  take  care  of  themselves,  or  were  they  hav- 
ing an  exhilarated  time  on  the  holiday  ? 

A.     One  finds  them  in  all  stages. 

Q.     How  great  a  proportion  of  these  were  swaggering  drunk  ? 

A.    I  have  seen  at  times  half  a  dozen  in  a  group. 

Q.     Is  that  an  every-day  business,  or  only  on  the  holidays  ? 

A.  It  is  more  prominent  and  noticeable  on  the  holidays  than  any  other 
time. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  of  the  laws  of  France  in  respect  to  intoxicating 
liquors  V 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  never  have  resided  in  France  more  than  a  month  at  a  time. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  In  regard  to  the  habits  of  drinking,  so  far  as  you 
have  observed  abroad,  with  reference  to  this  point,  stress  has  been  laid  upon 
the  plan  proposed  that  no  open  bars  are  to  be  allowed ;  but  that  guests  at 
eating-houses  are  to  be  served  with  liquors  at  the  table.  What  have  you 
observed  in  reference  to  this  matter  ? 

Q,  So  far  as  my  observation  has  gone,  I  should  judge  that  it  might  lead  to 
a  large  consumption.  Provision  is  made  for  the  tables,  and  the  guests, 
acquaintances,  and  loungers  gather  around  the  tables  instead  of  drinking  at 
the  bar.  They  are  accommodated  with  such  easy  places  for  lounging  that 
they  are  apt  to  remain  until  very  late  into  the  night,  and  a  portion  of  the  day. 

Q.  Is  this  method  of  drinking,  namely,  of  sitting  at  tables,  a  common 
one  observed  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  GEORGE  J.  CARLETON. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)    You  hold  the  office  of  Chaplain  of  the  State 
Prison  at  Charlestown  ? 
A.     I  do,  sir. 

Q.    How  many  years  have  you  been  there  ? 
A.    A  little  over  six  years. 
102 


810  APPENDIX. 

Q.  1  would  like  you  to  state  to  the  Committee  the  results  of  your  observa- 
tion and  conversation  with  convicts  touching  the  matter  of  the  use  of  liquor 
as  a  cause  and  occasion  of  their  crimes,  and  touching  their  feelings  with  regard 
to  open  places  of  traffic  and  their  love  of  drink,  and  any  other  facts  which 
may  have  come  under  your  observation  regarding  this  subject. 

A.  Well,  sir,  since  I  have  been  there  I  have  conversed  with  over  fourteen 
hundred  different  men,  and  I  have  spoken  with  them  particularly  with  regard 
to  the  matter  of  intoxicating  drinks,  and  I  have  found  that  out  of  that  num- 
ber more  than  fifteen-sixteenths  have  stated  that  intoxicating  liquor  had 
something  to  do  with  their  coming  there,  more  or  less.  That  is,  they  drank 
to  a  greater  or  less  extent.  And  eren  those  who  did  not  drink  have  had 
friends  and  others  who  did,  and  were  engaged  perhaps  in  bar-rooms,  and  in 
that  way  it  had  had  influence  with  them  in  the  commission  of  the  crime.  I 
have  found  that  all  of  the  men  (I  think  every  one),  who  were  there  for  the 
killing  of  their  wives,  have  told  me  that  that  was  done  while  they  were  under 
the  influence  of  intoxication.  I  know  that  many  of  them  feel  that  the  pro- 
hibitory law  is  just  the  thing  that  they  want  and  should  have  at  once.  They 
come  to  me  before  going  and  say  that  if  they  could  only  get  somewhere  where 
they  would  not  be  tempted,  they  could  get  on  well  enough.  And  some  of 
them,  Trith  tears  in  their  eyes,  tell  me  that  they  hardly  dare  to  venture  out.  I 
took  a  vote  the  other  day  among  the  convicts  upon  this  question.  There  were 
five  or  six  hundred  present.  I  asked  all  those  who  were  in  favor  of  a  prohib- 
itory law  to  raise  up  their  hands  ;  and  then  afterwards,  all  those  who  were  in 
favor  of  the  other.  And  about  half  as  many  raised  their  hands  for  a  license  law 
as  for  a  prohibitory  law.  Many  of  them  are  very  decided  in  regard  to  that 
point,  and  think  it  is  their  only  safety. 

Q.     Did  they  pretty  generally  vote  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  I  think  about  all  voted,  and  the  vote  was  more  than  two  to 
one. 

Q.  Has  it  been  a  rare  matter  for  prisoners  to  express  a  desire  to  have  some 
place  of  security  from  the  open  sale,  on  leaving  the  prison  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  it  has  not  been  rare. 

Q.  The  question  is  sometimes  raised  here,  whether  the  influence  of  the  law 
can  have  a  tendency  to  morality  or  virtue.  Do  you  find  persons  that  have 
been  brought  there  through  the  influence  of  liquors,  after  the  influence  and 
discipline  of  the  prison,  more  or  less  incline  to  uprightness  and  right-doing  ? 

A.     Well,  sir ;  we  think  that  is  the  case. 

Q.     And  these  circumstances  which  you  named  seem  to  favor  it  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Have  you  anything  further  which  you  desire  to  state  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  have  anything  particular  to  offer.  J  hope  that, 
as  Massachusetts  has  enacted  this  law,  it  will  be  carried  out.  I  do  not  know 
as  my  own  opinion  is  of  any  consequence  ;  but  it  seems  to  me  that  a  license 
system  having  failed,  that  we  should  make  a  fair  trial  of  the  law  we  have  got 
now.  I  want  to  have  the  law  carried  out ;  and  I  want  to  have  it  carried  out 
not  only  on  Patrick  Murphy  and  Bridget  Maloney,  but  on  the  people  who  live 
in  fine  houses  and  drink  their  champagne,  and  keep  it  in  their  cellars  covered 
frith  cobwebs.  I  want  these  men  tried  by  law.  There  was  a  Frenchman, 


APPENDIX.  811 

once,  who  undertook  to  discriminate  between  the  gout  and  the  rheumatism. 
Put  your  finger,  ho  said,  in  a  vice  and  give  it  one  turn,  and  that  is  rheumatism ; 
give  it  one  other  turn  and  that  is  gout.  J  believe  that  the  license  system  may 
be  considered  the  rheumatism,  and  we  have  tried  it  once.  And  now  we  give  it 
another  turn,  and  we  want  it  turned  thoroughly.  I  want  the  law  thoroughly 
tried,  and  then  if  it  will  not  do  any  good,  we  can  go  back  to  rheumatism  again. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  If  I  understand  you,  you  do  not  believe  that  there 
can  be  any  very  efficient  execution  of  this  law,  unless  it  extends  to  all  places  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  I  want  to  see  the  law  carried  out  among  high  and  low,  rich 
and  poor,  and  all  classes. 

Q.    No  great  good  will  come  of  it  unless  it  is  ? 

A.    I  want  to  see  what  effect  it  will  have. 

Q.  Do  you  believe  that  this  or  any  other  law  can  be  executed  by  taking  a 
certain  class  of  dealers  and  leaving  another  class  which  is  alike  guilty  ?  Can 
you  carry  out  such  a  law  for  any  length  of  time  ? 

A.    No,  sir;  I  do  not  think  that  is  just  the  thing  we  want. 

Q.    Do  you  believe  that  it  can  effect  anything  without  that  ? 

A.    It  will  not  be  as  effective  for  good  as  it  will  if  it  is  carried  out. 

Q.  The  policy  of  the  law  will  be  to  take  these  low  places.  Could  you,  in 
the  operation  of  the  law  for  any  length  of  time,  carry  it  out  in  these  low 
places  ? 

A.    I  suppose  not. 

Q.  Then,  so  far  as  the  execution  of  the  law  is  concerned,  it  is  defective  in 
accomplishing  the  good  that  it  is  designed  to  accomplish,  if  it  does  not  exclude 
the  sale  everywhere  ? 

A.  Well,  the  same  as  I  would  exclude  other  things.  I  do  not  find  any 
"  thus  saith  the  Lord  "  in  the  Bible,  that  we  shall  make  a  license  for  the  sale 
of  liquor. 

Q.     Do  you  find  any  "  thus  saith  the  Lord  "  for  a  prohibitory  law  ? 

A .  I  think  there  is.  There  is  a  principle  to  go  against  everything  that  is 
wrong..  I  believe  that  wine  is  injurious,  and  if  it  is  it  is  wrong  to  drink  it, 
I  think  it  is  wrong  to  sell  it. 

Q.  How  is  it  in  the  State  Prison,  in  regard  to  those  who  are  sentenced  for 
life  ?  After  staying  there,  do  they  generally  become  reformed  and  religious 


men 


A.  Well,  sir,  men  who  are  sent  there  for  life  do  not  generally  stay  there 
for  life.  I  have  found,  upon  looking  at  the  statistics,  that  the  average  term  of 
those  men  who  have  been  sentenced  to  the  prison  for  life  has  been  about  eight 
and  two-thirds  years.  They  are  almost  all  pardoned  out  sometime  or  other. 
There  are  some  who  stay. 

Q.     How  great  a  proportion  ? 

A.    It  is  very  small. 

Q.     What  is  the  whole  number  ? 

A.  I  should  say  that  out  of  550,  at  the  present  time,  there  might  be  twenty 
perhaps  who  give  evidence  of  being  better  men. 

Q.  Do  you  attribute  these  changes  to  the  fact  that  they  are  suffering 
punishment,  or  from  the  moral  and  religious  influences  brought  to  bear  upon 
them  ? 


812  APPENDIX. 

A.    Both,  sir. 

Q.     Which  is  greater  ? 

A.  Well,  sir,  I  should  say  the  latter,  the  moral  and  religious  influences 
brought  to  bear  upon  them. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  in  the  influence  of  law  itself  to  bring  about  moral 
changes  and  moral  convictions  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  there  is.  I  do  not  feel  prepared  to  give  a  decided 
answer,  but  my  impression  is  negative. 

Q.  Then  this  matter  of  punishment  is  not  reformatory  of  itself,  so  far  as 
the  law  is  concerned  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that,  as  a  general  thing,  it  is  reformatory  so  far  as  to 
make  the  person  in  heart  another  man.  It  may  reform  the  external  life,  and 
restrain  him  from  doing  a  great  many  things  that  he  might  otherwise  do. 
Theologically,  I  believe  that  a  man  may  be  reformed  and  not  be  thoroughly 
converted. 

Q.  If  you  shut  him  up  where  he  cannot  get  out,  of  course  he  would  not 
drink  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  But  unless  he  has  formed  some  conviction,  when  he  gets  out,  he  will 
drink? 

A.     He  will  be  apt  to. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  FAY.)     Does  the  inability  to  get  liquor  lessen  the  appetite  ? 

A.  I  think  it  does,  sir.  Say  a  man  has  been  there  a  year.  lie  says  that 
he  has  been  in  the  habit  of  drinking.  During  the  year  he  has  somewhat 
overcome  that  appetite,  and  he  feels  afraid  to  go  out,  for  fear  he  shall  take  it, 
and  then  it  will  come  back  again,  and  then  he  is  gone. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  Have  you  any  more  difficulty  with  the  element  of 
punishment  in  human  government  than  you  have  in  the  divine  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  I  have,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  if  the  Divine  Government  involves  punishment 
to  good  ends,  human  government  may  ? 

A.  I  should  answer  that  affirmatively ;  but  still  it  is  a  theological  point, 
and  I  should  want  an  hour  in  order  to  go  into  that  matter  fully. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  J.  M.  MANNING  (continued). 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  spoke  the  other  day  of  your  fear  of  the 
quality  of  the  liquors  that  came  from  the  State  Agency ;  that  you  had  a  bad 
impression  of  the  management  of  the  Agency,  and  expressed  your  intention 
of  looking  into  the  Agency.  Have  you  done  so,  and  if  so,  are  you  now 
satisfied  in  regard  to  the  state  of  things  there  ? 

A.  I  have  made  some  examination  in  regard  to  the  present  management 
of  the  liquor  agency,  and,  so  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  ascertain,  the  agency 
is  now  properly  managed.  In  the  remarks  which  I  made  the  other  day,  I 
distinctly  stated  that  I  did  not  speak  from  personal  knowledge  of  the  facts, 
but  merely  gave  the  impressions  that  I  had  received,  partly,  perhaps,  from 
reading  the  public  prints,  and  partly  from  conversations  with  various  individ- 
uals, and  perhaps  the  impression  which  I  had  at  that  time  arose  particularly 
from  what  I  had  understood  to  be  the  management  of  the  State  Liquor 


APPENDIX.  813 

Agency  under  a  gentleman  who  I  think  was  the  first  agent  of  the  Common- 
wealth. 

Q.    Do  you  refer  to  Mr.  Burnham  ? 

A.  I  think  that  he  was  the  gentleman.  My  impressions  were  more  par- 
ticularly associated  with  his  management  of  the  agency.  I  understand  that 
Mr.  Baker,  the  present  agent,  has  the  entire  confidence  of  the  community  x 
and  of  both  the  parties  here  in  controversy.  Mr.  Baker  stated  in  his  testi- 
mony that  he  shall  consider  himself  very  fortunate  if  he  can  leave,  on  retir- 
ing from  the  agency,  as  fair  a  record  as  his  predecessor.  I  have  inquired  of 
other  individuals  in  regard  to  their  impressions  of  the  management  of  the 
agency  by  Mr.  Baker  and  his  predecessor,  and  they  confirm  me  in  the  opinion 
which  I  give,  that  at  this  time  the  State  Liquor  Agency  is  well  managed,  and 
that  the  liquors  purchased  from  the  agency  may  be  depended  upon  as  pure. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  it  was  also  well  managed  by  his  predecessor,  Mr. 
Porter  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  that  is  the  opinion  I  have  formed. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  I  suppose  that  you  have  had  no  particular  analysis 
made  of  the  liquor  sold  by  Mr.  Baker,  but  gain  your  information  by  inquiry, 
from  others  ? 

A.  I  obtained  from  the  State  Agent,  through  the  City  Agent,  who  has  an 
office  in  the  same  building,  some  liquors  which  are  in  my  own  house  at  the 
present  time.  I  did  think  of  having  some  liquors  analyzed,  and  of  bringing 
specimens  here,  but  Mr.  Spooner  thought  that  it  would  not  be  necessary, 
especially  as  Mr.  Read  sent  me,  in  connection  with  these  liquors,  a  writing  in 
which  he  stated  that  the  liquors  of  which  specimens  were  sent  me,  had  been 
analyzed  by  Dr.  Hayes,  and  the  result  of  the  analysis  accompanied  the  liquors. 
I  felt  that  he  would  not  have  done  that,  if  he  were  not  sure  that  the  liquors 
were  pure. 

Q.     The  liquors  that  you  obtained,  were  obtained  from  Mr.  Read  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    Mr.  Read  has  been  in  that  office  four  or  five  weeks,  has  he  not  ? 

A-     I  do  not  know  how  long  he  has  been  there. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  of  the  fact  that  prior  to  that  time,  and  since  Mr.  Baker 
has  been  in  the  office,  he  had  no  right  to  sell  you  liquor  upon  the  prescription 
of  a  physician  ? 

A.  I  was  not  aware,  until  recently,  that  the  State  Agent  had  no  right  to 
sell  to  private  individuals. 

Q.  You  violated  the  law  if  you  got  it  elsewhere,  and  the  State  Agent  had 
uo  right  to  sell  to  you. 

A.  Somebody  violated  the  law  then,  and  I  suppose,  therefore,  that  I  am 
particeps  criminis.  I  did  not  know  that  such  was  the  case  until  I  was  so 
informed  within  a  day  or  two. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  I  do  not  know  how  you  use  the  term  particeps 
criminis.  Do  you  think,  if  you  purchase  a  quantity  of  liquor  of  a  person  who 
has  no  right  to  sell  it,  that  you  in  any  legal  sense  violate  the  law  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  J  do  not.  I  will  state  another  fact  in  regard  to  some 
liquors  which  I  purchased  from  one  who  is  engaged  in  traffic  as  a  private  busi- 
ness, purchasing  of  him,  under  the  impression  that  I  could  not  get  liquor  suit- 


814  APPENDIX. 

able  for  medicinal  purposes,  anywhere  else.  I  purchased  some  liquors  which 
were  taken  into  the  country  by  my  family  where  they  were  spending  the  sum- 
mer, less  than  a  year  ago.  In  the  course  of  the  summer  a  physician  was 
called,  and  it  became  necessary  to  use  some  of  that  liquor.  This  liquor  was 
purchased  as  a  pure  article  of  Cognac  brandy ;  the  physician  pronounced  it 
third  rate  Bourbon  whiskey.  That  is  my  experience  with  the  private  liquor 
dealers.  I  am  now  buying  at  the  City  Agency,  and  hope  to  get  a  better 
article.  I  trust  that  my  example  may  be  pretty  generally  followed. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  VALOROUS  TAFT. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  You  reside  in  Upton,  Worcester  County,  do  you 
not  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.    You  arc  chairman  of  the  County  Commissioners  of  Worcester  County  ? 

A.    I  am. 

Q.     For  how  long  have  you  been  so  ? 

A.  I  am  on  my  tenth  year  as  Commissioner,  and  on  my  seventh  year  as 
chairman. 

Q.     You  have  been  in  both  branches  of  the  Legislature,  have  you  not  ? 

A.     I  was  two  years  in  the  House,  and  two  years  in  the  Senate. 
,  Q.    In  the  discharge  of  your  duties  you  are  called  upon  to  visit  almost  all 
the  towns  of  the  county,  are  you  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  have  performed  the  duties  of  Commissioner  in  every  town 
in  our  county,  fifty-eight  towns  in  all. 

Q.  You  have  been  so  interested  in  the  subject  of  temperance,  I  suppose, 
that  you  have  observed  the  sentiment  of  the  people  and  the  manner  in  which 
the  law  is  enforced  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  think  I  understand  the  sentiment  of  the  people  of  Worces- 
ter County  as  well  as  almost  any  other  man  in  the  county. 

Q.  What  is  the  sentiment  of  the  people  on  this  matter  of  license  and  pro- 
hibition ? 

A.  The  sentiment  of  the  people  of  the  county  upon  that  question  is 
decidedly  in  favor  of  the  present  law,  and  that  sentiment  is  increasing  con- 
tinuously. 

Q,  You  say  that  the  sentiment  of  the  people  of  Worcester  County  is 
decidedly  in  favor  of  the  law  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  the  law  having  any  appreciable  effect  in  suppressing  the  sale  of 
liquor  in  that  county  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir  ;  I  think  there  has  been  a  steady  increase  of  the  temperance 
reformation  ever  since  the  law  was  upon  the  statute  book,  slow  it  is  true,  but 
sure. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  good  deal  of  activity  in  the  temperance  cause  ?  Are 
there  not  a  great  many  temperance  meetings  where  total  abstinence  is 
preached  and  the  pledge  circulated,  etc.  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir,  more  so  at  the  present  time  and  for  the  'last  four  weeks  than 
formerly ;  but  my  observation  arid  my  judgment  are  that  there  has  been  a 
growth  upon  the  subject.  I  have  given  considerable  attention  to  the  subject 


APPENDIX.  815 

for  the  last  thirty  years,  being  a  practical  temperance  man  myself  and  associ- 
ating with  gentlemen  of  that  class.  My  duties  as  commissioner  are  to 
visit  our  houses  of  correction  four  times  a  year.  When  I  came  upon  the 
Board  in  1858  I  found  one  hundred  and  fifty-seven  or  one  hundred  and  sixty- 
seven  inmates  in  the  houses  of  correction.  It  being  a  larger  number  than  I 
had  supposed,  I  looked  into  the  reasons  why  they  came  there,  and  the  result 
of  my  observation  was  that  seven-eighths  of  them  came  to  the  house  of 
correction  directly  through  the  drinking  of  rum.  Yesterday  I  visited  the 
jail  and  house  of  correction  at  Fitchburg.  There  were  fifty  inmates.  Saturday 
we  had  at  Worcester  fifty-four,  making  one  hundred  and  four  at  present  in 
all  in  the  county.  Ten  years  ago,  about  the  same  time  in  the  year,  we  had 
one  hundred  and  fifty-seven,  and  I  think  one  hundred  and  sixty-seven.  I 
have  not  been  at  the  prison  since  Saturday,  but  I  presume  there  are  about 
the  same  number  now  there  as  then.  Of  these  one  hundred  and  four  I 
suppose  about  thirty  have  been  committed  as  vagrants.  In  the  month  of 
December  there  were  fifty-four  commitments  to  the  two  houses  of  correction, 
by  the  police  court  of  Worcester,  for  vagrancy,  something  that  we  had  heard 
but  little  of  formerly.  The  number  of  vagrants  being  so  large,  my  attention 
was  called  to  it  particularly,  and  I  found  that  they  were  composed  of  a  class 
of  men  that  did  not  belong  to  our  county.  Some  I  found  belonged  in  Salem, 
some  in  Marblehead,  some  in  Springfield  and  some  in  New  York.  Upon 
inquiry  I  learned  that  the  trains  that  came  in  in  the  evening  from  the  south- 
west and  north  brought  in  persons  who  had  no  money,  and  of  course  they 
went  to  the  station-house ;  and  the  officers  told  me  that  it  had  become  so 
frequent  and  had  become  such  a  nuisance,  that  as  a  matter  of  self-preserva- 
tion they  took  this  course  of  committing  them  as  vagrants,  and  they  were 
sent  over  for  three  months.  Thus  the  larger  number  were  not  sent  there  as 
drunkards.  They  were  men  who  had  been  in  the  habit  of  drinking,  but  not 
drunk  when  arrested.  They  had  no  visible  means  of  support  and  were 
passed  over.  Some  of  the  Commissioners  thought  it  wrong,  and  we  advised 
our  overseers  to  pardon  them  out,  and  several  were  pardoned  out. 

Q.     How  many  did  you  say  ? 

A.  I  think  there  were  fifty-four  commitments  from  the  police  court  of 
Worcester  during  the  month  of  December.-  Of  the  most  of  those  their  terms 
have  expired.  I  presume  there  are  twenty  or  thirty  now  of  that  class  of  men 
who  do  not  belong  to  our  county ;  so  we  really  have  not  in  our  prisons  to-day 
but  seventy-five  or  eighty  of  our  own  population  who  should  be  there. 

Q.    But  ten  years  before  yon  had  157  or  167  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  How  many  of  those  were  committed  for  intemper- 
ance V 

A .  I  should  say  about  seven-eighths.  I  have  not  looked  into  that  subject 
during  the  last  six  months ;  but,  generally,  I  should  say  about  seven-eighths 
were  committed  for  drunkenness. 

Q.  The  number  of  commitments,  I  suppose,  does  not  necessarily  decide  the 
amount  of  intemperance  in  the  community;  but  depends  rather  upon  the 
vigilance  of  the  officers,  does  it  not? 


816  APPENDIX. 

A.  My  experience  is  that  the  amount  of  intemperance  depends  upon  this : 
the  easier  obtained,  and  the  more  plenty  liquor  is,  the  larger  is  the  amount  of 
drunkenness ;  and  the  harder  it  is  to  get,  and  the  fewer  the  places  in  which  it 
is  sold,  the  more  temperate  will  the  community  be. 

Q.     There  are  places  where  it  is  sold,  I  suppose,  in  Worcester  County  ? 

A.    Just  now,  I  think,  it  would  be  very  hard  to  get  any. 

Q.    How  has  it  been  during  the  past  two  years  ? 

A.  There  has  been  less  intemperance  during  the  last  two  years  than  there 
was  for  that  period  ten  years  ago,  according  to  the  population. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  How  is  if  in  Worcester  now  in  regard  to  obtaining 
liquor  ? 

A.  The  gentlemen  who  say  they  use  it  say  that  it  is  hard  to  find.  They 
say  that  it  is  very  dry  times  there — it  is  quite  hard  for  them  to  get  it.  As  they 
express  it,  we  "  have  got  it  drove  into  a  short  corner." 

Q.  Is  the  law  against  drunkenness  enforced  more  rigidly  than  it  used  to 
be? 

A.    I  should  say  in  about  the  same  proportion. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICIL)  What  would  you  say  of  the  comparative  amount 
of  liquors  used  in  your  town  or  in  Worcester  County  at  present,  as  compared 
with  the  amount  used  ten  or  twenty  years  ago  ? 

A.  I  made  the  statement  the  other  day,  that  in  my  own  town,  according 
to  the  population,  there  was  not  one-tenth  part  of  the  liquor  used  that  was 
used  ten  years  ago.  That  statement  having  been  called  in  question,  I  exam- 
ined more  closely  and  revised  my  judgment,  and  put  it  at  one-fifteenth  rather 
than  to  increase  it.  I  can  only  go  back  about  thirty-five  years.  On  my  first 
experience  of  going  to  town  meeting,  they  were  lying  out  by  the  half  dozen 
dead  drunk  ;  but  we  have  not  seen  that  for  the  last  ten  years. 

Q.  I  know  that  your  intercourse  with  the  people  is  as  general  and  as  inti- 
mate as  that  of  any  other  man  in  Worcester  County.  I  would  ask  your 
judgment  as  to  the  question  of  drinking  among  the  young  men  of  that  county, 
and  among  the  active  business  men,  the  farmers,  the  mechanics  and  the  clerks, 
as  compared  with  what  it  was  in  former  times? 

A.  It  is  not  to  be  compared  at  all  with  former  times.  It  is  a  rare  thing 
with  our  well-to-do  business  men,  our  farmers  and  our  mechanics,  to  indulge 
in  the  habitual  use  of  liquors.  There  are  a  great  many  men  who,  if  they 
were  invited  to  your  house  and  a  bottle  of  wine  was  set  upon  the  table,  would 
not  refuse  to  take  a  glass  ;  but  if  you  were  invited  to  their  houses  it  would  be 
very  seldom  that  you  would  find  any  liquor.  Of  course  gentlemen  understand 
that  in  a  county  like  Worcester,  where  there  are  few  hotels  in  the  country 
villages,  my  business  calling  me  all  through  the  country,  I  have  to  stop  at 
private  houses,  and  it  is  a  rare  thing  that  gentlemen  offer  me  intoxicating 
drinks,  even  cider. 

Q.  Is  it  not  true  that  this  prohibitory  law  is  better  enforced  in  some  towns 
than  in  others  ? 

-.4.     Altogether. 

Q.    And  that  it  is  better  enforced  at  some  times  than  at  other  times  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 


APPENDIX.  817 

Q.  Have  you  not  observed  that  where  the  law  is  properly  enforced  there 
is  an  increase  of  good  order  and  business,  and  a  diminution  of  crime  and 
pauperism  ? 

A.  Certainly,  sir.  I  know  where  the  convicts  come  from.  We  expect 
them  to  come  from  the  places  where  liquor  is  most  sold. 

Q.  They  come  from  those  places  where  liquor  is  sold,  and  where  the  law 
is  not  so  well  enforced  ? 

A .  They  do.  I  would  like  to  state  another  point  in  regard  to  the  State 
Agency  and  its  operation  in  my  town.  I  can  only  speak  for  my  own  town. 
I  think  the  citizens  of  my  town  do  not,  generally,  patronize  the  State  Agent. 
There  has  been  more  or  less  complaint  of  the  liquors  that  have  been  bought 
there.  When  the  law  went  into  effect,  I  was  chairman  of  the  Board  of 
Selectmen.  We  appointed  an  agent,  and  the  board  sent  me  to  Boston  to  buy 
liquors.  I  inquired  who  kept  good  liquors,  and  was  directed  to  Moses 
Williams.  I  went  there  and  bought  a  pipe  of  gin,  a  cask  of  brandy,  a  barrel 
of  port  wine,  a  barrel  of  sherry  wine,  a  barrel  of  Madeira  wine,  and  a  barrel 
of  alcohol  of  another  party.  I  told  Williams  what  I  wanted  the  liquor  for. 
He  said  he  had  some  that  was  pure,  and  wanted  me  to  test  it.  I  said  that  I 
knew  nothing  about  testing  liquor,  but  trusted  entirely  to  his  judgment ;  I 
was  willing  to  pay  what  it  was  worth,  if  he  would  only  give  me  a  good  article. 
I  brought  that  liquor  home,  and  there  was  more  complaint  of  the  quality 
of  that  liquor  than  there  has  been  of  any  ever  sold  there  since,  though  my 
judgment  is  that  the  wines  I  bought  of  Mr.  Williams  are  as  good  as  we  ever 
had.  I  base  that  opinion  upon  the  testimony  of  gentlemen  who  knew  the 
quality  of  wine.  Those  who  never  drank  but  little  wine,  found  particular 
objection  to  the  port  wine,  and  said  that  it  was  good  for  nothing.  Those 
who  had  been  more  accustomed  to  the  use  of  wine,  said  it  was  the  best  they 
had  ever  had.  I  got  more  cursings  for  the  purchase  of  that  liquor  than  for 
anything  I  ever  did  in  my  life.  I  bought  it  of  Mr.  Williams.  There  was 
more  or  less  complaint  found  with  the  whole  of  it.  There  is  less  complaint 
of  the  liquor  latterly  than  formerly.  Our  practice  is  to  sell  for  what  it  costs 
us,  and  neither  make  nor  lose  on  the  sale.  I  stat  e  this  because  I  have  heard 
considerable  fault  found  with  the  liquor  agency. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  EZRA  S.  GANNETT,  D.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  know  the  question  at  issue.     We  shall  be 
glad  to  have  you  give  your  views  upon  the  subject. . 

A.  It  seems  to  me  that  a  license  law  is  wrong  both  in  principle  and  in 
policy.  It  seems  to  me  wrong  in  principle  because  it  throws  the  sanction  of 
the  Commonwealth  over  a  practice  which  leads  to  an  incalculable  amount  of 
mischief.  It  seems  to  me  wrong  in  policy,  because  I  have  never  yet  learned 
from  any  observation  or  from  any  testimony,  that  license  laws  could  be  so  ' 
enforced  as  to  prevent  the  great  amount  of  intemperance  in  the  Common- 
wealth. I  think,  therefore,  some  more  stringent  measure  than  a  license  policy 
should  be  adopted.  I  have  been  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory  law,  because  it 
seemed  to  me  that  the  trouble,  suffering  and  wickedness  that  follow  upon  intox- 
ication, and  the  insufficiency  of  all  other  means,  both  legal  and  moral  that  have 
ever  been  tried,  have  never  been  perceptibly  lessened  by  license  laws,  and  wo 
103 


818  APPENDIX. 

are  now  bound,  as  citizens  of  the  Commonwealth,  to  resort  to  some  other 
measure.  And,,  then,  a  prohibitory  measure  having  been  introduced,  a  pro- 
hibitory law  having  been  passed,  it  seems  to  me  that  it  should  be  enforced.  I 
feel  that  it  would  be  wrong  to  repeal  the  prohibitory  law  until  it  has  been  put 
to  such  a  fair  and  full  trial  that  its  ineflicacy  shall  be  established.  I  think 
that  has  never  yet  been  done. 

Q.  (By  Mr  CHILD.)  You  say  that  you  desire  to  have  the  experiment  of 
the  prohibitory  law  fully  tried.  Is  there  anything  in  the  present  arrangement 
that  is  going  to  secure  the  execution  .of  the  law  in  future  more  than  formerly  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know,  sir ;  and  I  do  not  know  enough  in  regard  to  the  law  to 
answer  your  question  fully.  I  only  know  that  the  law  has  not  been  enforced, 
and  I  believe  that  it  can  be  enforced.  Where  the  difficulty  has  been  in  the 
past  I  am  not  competent  to  tell. 

Q.  There  is  no  way  of  enforcing  the  law  but  by  securing  convictions  by 
the  juries,  is  there  ? 

A.     Of  course  not. 

Q.  If  under  the  prosecutions,  as  brought  by  the  State  Constabulary,  there 
is  the  same  disinclination  to  convict  on  the  part  of  juries  as  formerly,  will 
there  be  any  real  difference  in  the  enforcement  of  the  law  ? 

A.  I  think  that  there  is  something  else  than  disinclination  that  should  be 
taken  into  account.  Their  consciences  have  been  opposed  to  it. 

Q.  Suppose  that  they  will  not  convict,  there  is  nothing  in  the  law  to  cor- 
rect their  consciences,  is  there  ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  the  matter  of  conscience  is  beyond  human  law.  If  I  found 
that  juries  would  not  convict,  and  believed  it  was  owing  to  a  disinclination,  I 
should  raise  the  question  whether  or  not  some  still  more  efficient  measure 
could  not  be  introduced. 

Q.  From  your  observations  in  Boston  do  you  think  it  more  difficult  to 
enforce  the  liquor  law  here  than  in  the  country  ? 

A.  I  think  so  from  what  I  have  heard.  My  observations,  however,  are 
confined  to  the  city  rather  than  to  the  country. 

Q.  What  do  you  think  would  be  the  effect  in  promoting  temperance,  or  in 
suppressing  intemperance,  if  the  law  were  enforced  in  the  country  but  not  in 
Boston  ? 

A.  I  do  not  like  to  recognize  the  possibility  of  the  fact  that  a  law  for  the 
public  good  cannot  be  enforced  in  the  metropolis  of  the  Commonwealth. 

Q.  Your  opinion,  then,  is  that  the  law  being  right  ought  to  be  enforced, 
and  therefore  you  assumed  that  it  will  be  ? 

A.  I  have  hardly  said  as  much  as  that.  It  seems  to  me  that  it  can  be 
enforced,  but  I  dare  not  say  that  it  will  be  until  it  has  had  a  more  thorough 
trial. 

Q.  Do  you  know  of  any  other  trial  to  which  it  is,  or  will  be  subjected, 
and  by  which  the  practicability  of  its  enforcement  can  be  tested,  than  those 
which  have  already  been  attempted  ? 

A .  I  think  if  the  State  Constabulary  should  continue  to  pursue  the  course 
which  I  believe  and  hope  they  have  pursued  for  the  last  year  ;  if  a  determina- 
ition  were  shown  by  the  municipal,  as  well  as  the  State  authorities,  to  enforce 


APPENDIX.  819 

this  law,  and  the  moral  sentiment  of  the  people  could  also  be  aroused,  and  they 
led  to  sustain  the  legal  action,  I  believe  that  the  law  then  could  be  put  into  effect. 

Q.  It  all  depends  upon  whether  the  juries  could  be  brought  to  convict ; 
and  if  they  decline  to  convict,  are  not  the  wheels  of  the  machine  stopped  ? 

A.  I  have  rather  avoided  answering  that  question  in  that  form,  because  it 
obliges  me  to  suppose  that  juries  are  not  rightly  constituted.  I  am  hardly 
willing  to  make  that  admission.  I  have  no  right  to  believe  it,  but  it  seems  to 
me  to  be  nearly  so.  If  there  is  to  be  no  change  in  the  character  and  conduct 
of  the  juries  from  what  it  has  been  within  the  last  year  or  two,  and  no  change 
in  the  law,  I  do  not  know  that  it  could  be  enforced.  Then  the  question  would 
arise  whether  there  may  not  be  some  change  in  the  law  which,  though  not 
setting  aside  the  right  of  trial  by  jury,  should  yet  secure  the  enforcement  of 
the  law. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  it  would  be  a  good  policy  to  close  all  the  bars  in 
public  houses  and  eating  houses,  although  the  public  houses  were  permitted  to 
furnish  wine  or  cider  to  their  guests  at  their  meals  ?  Do  you  not  think  that 
such  a  change  would  be  an  improvement  on  the  present  state  of  affairs  ? 

A.  It  might  be  in  a  moral  point  of  view.  I  do  not  know  what  the  per- 
manent effect  might  be. 

Q.  No  such  thing  as  that  has  ever  been  seen  in  Boston  under  any  system 
of  law.  The  bars  at  which  men  go  and  drink  their  grog  have  never  been 
closed  in  Boston  to  your  knowledge,  have  they  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Now  if  the  law  were  changed  and  so  enforced  as  to  accomplish  that 
result,  would  it  not  be  an  advance  in  a  moral  point  of  view  over  any  system 
of  legislation  we  have  ever  yet  had  in  Boston  ? 

A.    It  appears  to  me  that  it  would,  if  I  understand  the  question  fairly. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  there  would  be  more  probability  of  enforcing  a 
law  of  that  kind  than  the  present  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  I  did  quite  understand  your  question.  Are  you 
suggesting  that  a  different  law  from  the  prohibitory  law  should  be  tried  ? 

Q.     Yes,  sir. 

A.     I  do  not  know  what  other  law  you  have  in  mind. 

Q.  I  refer  to  a  law  that  prohibits  the  sale  and  shuts  up  every  open  bar  in 
the  State,  so  that  liquor,  except,  at  meals  at  public  houses,  could  not  be 
obtained,  and  would  permit  no  liquor  to  be  drank  at  any  store  or  shop  where 
it  might  be  procured. 

A.  I  think  that  the  exception  of  allowing  it  be  drank  at  meals  would  open 
a  very  wide  door. 

Q.  The  question  is  if  it  could  be  enforced  would  it  not  be  a  very  great 
improvement  upon  the  present  state  of  things,  or  do  you  think  it  would  fall 
below  that? 

Q.  I  think  that  the  prohibitory  law  would  better  produce  the  desired 
effect. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  there  is  a  difficulty  in  placing  the  Parker  House  or 
the  Revere  House,  or  any  of  those  large  hotels,  upon  the  same  basis  that  you 
place  one  of  the  low  cellars  V 

A.     There  is  a  practical  difficulty. 


820  APPENDIX. 

Q.  When,  therefore,  you  undertake  to  ask  a  juror  to  convict  the  keeper 
and  declare  the  Revere  House  to  be  a  nuisance,  just  as  much  and  just  as  great 
a  nuisance  as  the  low  groggery  in  a  cellar  on  North  Street,  is  there  not  a 
practical  difficulty  in  the  judgment  of  common  sense  men  in  undertaking  to 
say  that  one  is  as  much  a  nuisance  as  the  other  ? 

A.  There  is  a  difficulty  in  the  judgment  of  most  men.  Whether  I  should 
consider  them  as  more  entitled  to  be  called  common  sense  men  or  not,  I  do 
not  know.  I  think  I  should  look  at  the  principle  involved,  and  I  should  find 
the  principle  the  same  in  the  two  cases. 

Q.     The  principle  is  the  same,  but  the  practical  effect  is  very  different  ? 

A .     I  do  not  know. 

Q.  I  mean  the  conclusion.  The  juror  upon  his  oath  says  that  one  house 
is  a  nuisance — as  great  a  nuisance  as  the  other.  Does  anybody  think  that 
it  is? 

A .  With  me  'the  answer  would  depend  somewhat  upon  what  was  meant  by 
the  word  "  nuisance."  But  if  I  am  asked  whether  I  think  that  the  intemper- 
ance produced  among  the  higher  classes  is  any  less  a  calamity  than  the  intem- 
perance produced  in  the  small,  dark  shops  in  North  Street,  I  should  answer 
that  I  doubted  whether  there  was  any  essential  difference. 

Q.  Is  there  not  a  difficulty  in  enforcing  the  law  against  the  low  grog-shops 
in  North  Street,  when  the  authorities  select  them  for  punishment,  and  leaving 
the  larger  houses,  that  under  the  law  are  equally  guilty,  unprosecuted  ? 

A.    1  should  think  there  would  be. 

Q.  Is  not  that  one  of  the  difficulties  that  the  execution  of  this  law 
encounters  when  you  undertake  to  make  it  prohibitory — that  the  law  is  alike 
in  all  cases,  and  the  application  of  it  is  different  in  different  cases  ? 

A.  The  application  of  the  laws  depends  upon  the  prosecuting  officers,  it 
seems  to  me. 

Q.  How  long  do  you  suppose  the  prosecuting  officers  should  expect  to 
prosecute  these  low  places  and  leave  the  high  places  untouched  ? 

A.  I  think  they  might  do  that  for  an  indefinite  period,  but  they  would  be 
neglecting  a  part  of  their  duty  if  they  did  so. 

Q.  Would  they  accomplish  even  the  closing  of  the  low  places,  while  they 
left  the  larger  places  open  ? 

A.     I  do  not  see  why  they  should  not. 

Q.  I  suppose  that  the  system  of  law  which  woukl  most  effectually  check 
evils  of  intemperance  would  meet  your  approval  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  are  not  wedded,  I  suppose,  to  any  particular  form  of  law,  or  to 
any  particular  theory  of  law  ? 

A.    I  am  not. 

Q.  If  then  it  may  be  supposed  that  by  any  modification  of  this  law  it  may 
be  made  more  effective  in  checking  the  evils  of  intemperance  than  the  pres- 
ent, I  suppose  that  you  would  be  in  favor  of  that  modification  ? 

A.  I  should  favor  it  if  it  did  not  involve  the  vicious  principle  of  giving 
the  direct  or  indirect  sanction  of  the  Commonwealth  to  this  evil. 

Q.  How  does  the  fact  of  granting  a  license  in  the  form  that  has  been  pro- 
posed, give  to  the  evil  the  sanction  of  the  Commonwealth  ?  We  assume  that 


APPENDIX.  821 

the  right  to  sell  liquor  is  a  right  belonging  to  everybody,  inasmuch  as  the  con- 
stitution and  the  laws  of  the  country  make  this  liquor  an  article  of  commerce 
and  an  article  of  sale,  and  the  right  of  selling  admits  the  right  of  buying 
necessarily. .  That  is  the  real  state  of  things  when  we  look  at  it.  But  this 
sale  of  liquors  is  liable  to  be  abused.  If  the  Legislature  are  of  the  opinion 
that  the  present  law  cannot  be  fully  enforced,  that  they  cannot  make  an 
entire  sweep  clear  through  the  State  by  it,  may  they  not  modify  it  and  say — 
"  We  will  go  as  far  as  we  can,  and  not  allow  the  sale  under  certain  circum- 
stances," but  yet  seek  to  restrain  no  further  than  this  point  ?  Would  such 
an  action  of  the  Legislature  approve  or  sanction  the  sale  beyond  that  point  ? 
A.  If  it  could  be  put  simply  in  that  form,  I  do  not  say  that  it  would.  If 
the  law  should  simply  say  that  the  State  imposes  a  restraint,  so  far  I  think  it 
does  not;  but  if  you  grant  permission  to  sell  to  a  certain  extent,  that  involves 
a  different  principle. 

Q.  It  is  not  because  the  State  grants  permission  that  a  man  has  a  right  to 
sell,  but  it  is  because  it  is  a  natural  and  legal  right  that  he  had  before  any 
law  was  enacted  ? 

A.  I  should  be  obliged  to  say  that  in  a  common-sense  light  of  the  subject 
I  looked  at  it  differently.  I  should  say  that  the  moment  the  Commonwealth 
should  say  to  a  person  engaged  in  this  traffic,  that  if- he  will  pay  the  State  so 
much  money  the  State  will  permit  him  to  do  something  that  other  people 
cannot  do,  it  would  lend  the  sanction  of  the  law  to  the  act. 

Q.  That  would  be  true  if  this  law  granted  permission  to  sell  that  did  not 
exist  before  the  law,  but  if  there  is  a  mistaken  theory  upon  this  whole  matter, 
if  the  right  is  one  that  has  existed  and  does  exist  independently  of  the  action 
of  the  Legislature,  would  not  the  principle  be  different  ? 

A.  When  1  said  that  I  had  no  theory  in  regard  to  the  law,  I  meant  in 
regard  to  the  particular  act  of  legislation  ;  but  I  have  a  theory,  I  think  the 
Commonwealth  is  bound  to  support  the  morality  of  its  citizens,  and  has  the 
right  to  restrict  individual  liberty  under  certain  circumstances. 

Q.  And  the  limitation  of  that  restriction  would  be  that  which  would 
secure  the  greatest  amount  of  public  good  ? 

A.  There  may  be  a  certain  amount  of  restraint  and  yet  be  connected  with 
it  a  certain  amount  of  indulgence,  and  thereby  the  law  might  license  a  man 
to  do  an  act  and  restrain  another  from  doing  the  same  act.  In  such  a  case 
the  law  might  do  more  harm  than  good. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Are  you  aware  of  the  character  of  the  legal  pro- 
vision known  as  the  "  search  and  seizure  clause"  under  the  existing  law  ? 
A.    I  know  very  little  of  the  law. 

Q.     Are  you  aware  that  liquors  believed  to  be  held  or  which  can  be  shown 
to  be  held  illegally  may  be  taken  by  authority  of  the  State  ? 
A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  that  those  liquors,  if  a  claimant  appears,  are  brought  before  the 
Commonwealth,  and  if  the  jury  agree  in  saying  that  they  are  not  illegally 
held  they  are  returned  to  the  owner ;  and  if  they  agree  in  saying  that  they 
are  not  legally  holden  they  are  condemned  and  destroyed  if  found  impure.  If 
they  disagree  the  cause  remains  open  and  the  liquors  are  still  held  by  the 
Commonwealth  until  they  do  agree.  My  question  is  :  after  such  a  state  of 


822  APPENDIX. 

things,  does  it  not  appear  that  infidelity,  even  in  the  jury  box,  cannot  defeat 
the  law,  since  the  holding  of  the  liquors  for  a  decision  of  the  jury  is  a  practical 
confiscation  of  the  stock  in  trade  ? 

A.  I  should  think  that  would  be  the  result.  There  are  some  things  in 
the  law  that  I  do  not  quite  understand,  but  I  think  that  you  have  stated  the 
fact. 

Q.  You  were  questioned  hypothetically  whether  if  the  prohibitory  law  can- 
not suppress  the  sale  of  liquor  in  the  Parker  House  or  in  the  Revere  House — 
the  Parker  and  E-evere  Houses  were  indicated — whether  it  could  be  made  prac- 
tically successful  in  restraining  the  "sale  in  the  lower  houses.  Does  not  that 
hypothesis  bear  equally  against  the  license  scheme  as  against  the  prohibitory 
scheme  ? 

A.    I  should  think  so. 

Q.  Do  you  perceive  any  encroachment  upon  the  rights  of  the  people  by 
the  enforcement  of  a  prohibitory  law  that  would  not  be  involved  so  fur  as 
applied  in  a  license  law  ? 

A.  I  think  I  do,  but  I  do  not  see  in  the  prohibitory  law  any  encroachment 
upon  the  rights  of  individuals  which  the  Commonwealth  is  not  permitted,  and, 
if  it  sees  proper,  bound  to  make. 

Q.  In  what  respect  db  you  conceive  that  the  prohibitory  law  infringes 
upon  the  rights  of  individuals,  so  far  as  the  principle  is  concerned,  more 
extensively  than  a  license  law  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  I  understand  the  terms  of  the  respective  laws,  but 
suppose  that  the  prohibitory  law  laid  a  more  severe  penalty  upon  its  violation 
than  does  the  license  law. 

Q.  That  remains  to  be  seen.  They  propose  to  retain,  as  I  understand 
their  policy,  the  prohibitory  law  with  its  penalties,  but  modify  that  law  by 
granting  licenses  ? 

A.  Then,  so  far,  they  would  be  alike  in  their  bearing  upon  individuals ;  but 
I  suppose  that  a  prohibitory  law  would  bear  upon  many  more  persons  than  a 
license  law. 

Q.  I  grant  you  that  natural  rights  are  restrained  under  the  government ;  I 
grant  you  that  what  would  be  otherwise  a  natural  right  is,  in  view  of  existing 
evils,  restraint  by  the  prohibitory  law ;  but  I  wish  to  ask  you  whether,  in  so 
far  as  persons  are  prevented  by  the  holding  of  a  license  under  the  license 
system,  restrictions  are  not  imposed  upon  them  by  the  license  law  as  stringent 
as  the  restrictions  imposed  by  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A.  The  prohibitory  law  says  to  the  people,  -'You  shall  not  do  this."  A 
license  law  says  to  some  that  they  shall  not,  but  to  others  that  they  may. 

Q.  The  proposition  here  is  to  so  construct  that  law  that  while  it  says  to 
some  "  you  may,"  it  says  to  everybody  else  "  you  shall  not  ?  " 

A.     Then  the  two  laws  would  be  upon  the  same  footing. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  The  principle  I  brought  to  your  notice  was  this.  It 
was  not  as  to  the  character  of  the  law,  but  as  to  its  execution.  Suppose,  for 
instance,  fifty  men  are  alike  guilty  of  violating  the  law,  they  are  all  exposed 
to  the  same  penalty — the  house  of  correction.  Now,  when  the  authorities 
undertake  to  select  twenty  of  those  fifty,  or  fifteen  of  those  fifty,  and  prosecute 
them  and  send  them  to  the  house  of  correction,  but  make  no  attempt  nor 


APPENDIX.  823 

movement  to  enforce  the  law  against  the  others,  but  suffer  them  to  go  on  in 
the  violation  of  the  law,  can  you  expect  that  such  an  execution  of  the  law, 
upon  a  part  and  not  upon  the  others,  can  to  any  extent  or  for  any  length  of 
time  be  carried  out  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir ;  I  think  the  moral  effect  upon  the  community,  by  such  a  dis- 
crimination, would  be  bad ;  but,  generally,  so  far  as  the  law  is  executed,  its 
effect  would  be  good. 

Q.  What  effect  do  you  suppose  such  a  discrimination  would  have  upon  the 
juries  and  upon  the  prosecuting  officers  ? 

A.  I  think  it  would  produce  great  disrespect  towards  the  prosecuting 
officer. 

Q.  What  would  be  the  effect  upon  a  jury  in  securing  convictions  upon 
these  cases  ? 

A.  1  suppose  that  the  jurors  would  consider  the  merits  of  the  case,  and 
not  whether  the  prosecuting  officer  had  done  but  a  part  or  the  whole  of  his 
duty. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  it  would  be  better  if  a  discrimination  was  to  be 
made  between  the  different  kinds  of  houses,  that  such  a  discrimination  should 
be  made  by  the  law  and  not  by  the  executive  officer  '? 

A.  I  think  that  the  principle  that  would  be  involved  in  such  a  discrimina- 
tion, by  the  Commonwealth  saying  to  certain  persons  that  they  might  do 
wrong,  would  be  bad  in  its  tendency ;  but  the  present  law  does  not  leave  such 
discrimination  to  the  officer.  If  he  be  an  honest  man,  he  will  do  his  duty 
without  such  discrimination. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  I  suppose  it  should  appear,  in  connection  with  the 
hypotheses  that  these  questions  have  involved,  that  the  State  Constabulary 
are  at  work  in  a  city  of  two  hundred  thousand  inhabitants,  where  the  liquor 
power  is  backed  by  an  immense  sum  of  money,  testing  the  question  whether 
the  law  can  or  cannot  be  executed.  Will  you  think  it  unwise  for  the  Con- 
stabulary to  attack  the  enemy  in  his  weakest  point,  and  carry  citadel  after 
citadel  as  far  as  possible  ? 

A.  If  I  can  turn  your  figurative  language  into  plain  language,  I  would  do 
all  I  could  to  enforce  the  law,  if  that  is  what  you  mean. 

Q.  And  if  it  simply  appeared  that  the  Constabulary  were  hemming  in  the 
heavier  dealers,  and  had  brought  them  to  a  point  where  they  were  feeling 
that  it  was  necessary  to  put  forth  every  effort  to  save  themselves,  would  you 
net  think  that  the  officers  were  acting  wisely  ? 

A.     I  should  tell  them  to  do  their  duty  and  enforce  the  law. 

TESTIMONY  OF  DR.  A.  J.  BELLOWS,  (continued.) 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  desire  to  add  something  to  your  testimony 
of  yesterday,  do  you  not  ? 

A.  I  was  asked  a  question  by  Governor  Andrew  in  reference  to  the  dis- 
crepancy of  opinion  among  physicians  in  regard  to  the  nutritive  property  of 
alcohol,  but  I  was  not  permitted  to  answer  the  question  because  of  the  shortness 
of  time.  I  want  permission  now  to  answer  Mr.  Andrew's  question,  and  not  be 
compelled  to  answer  the  question  simply  yes  or  no,  but  to  give  a  reason  for 
my  answer.  There  is  a  principle,  a  physiological  principle,  which  I  wish  to 


824  APPENDIX. 

present  to  this  Committee,  that  -I  think  will  settle  this  whole  question  in  regard 
to  the  difference  of  opinion  among  doctors.  It  is  a  principle  that  whatever 
nutritive  elements  are  desired  by  nature,  must  be  furnished  through  God's 
own  laboratory  of  vegetable  creation;  that  nothing  can  be  permitted  to  enter 
the  system  but  what  has  come  through  the  vegetable  world  ;  and  that  there  is 
a  very  distinct  and  marked  difference  between  physiological  chemistry  and 
chemistry  pertaining  to  inorganic  matter  ;  that  everything  that  is  not  accord- 
ing to  physiological  chemistry  organized  by  God  in  His  own  -works,  is  poison- 
ous, and  upon  that  principle  we  can  see  just  what  is  and  what  is  not  to  be 
used  as  nourishment.  In  the  first  pla"ce  testimony  is  abundant, — and  I  have 
given  some  portion  of  it, — that  alcohol  is  poison.  The  testimony  of  Youmans 
which  is  referred  to,  is  very  clear  upon  that  point.  He  says  : 

"  It  is  a  powerful  antagonist  to  the  digestive  process.  It  prevents  the 
natural  changes  going  on  in  the  blood.  It  impedes  the  liberation  of  carbonic 
acid — a  deadly  poison.  It  obstructs  the  nutritive  and  reparative  functions. 
It  produces  disease  of  the  liver.  It  has  a  powerful  affinity  for  the  substance 
of  the  brain, — being,  indeed,  essentially  a  brain  poison" 

And  my  opinion  then  is,  that,  if  we  would  act  on  that  simple  principle,  we 
can  easily  see  how  the  conflicting  opinions  of  the  doctors  may  be  reconciled. 
Whatever  is  made  out  of  the  dust  of  the  earth  in  God's  own  laboratory,  is 
nutritive,  and  that  which  is  not  thus  made,  is  poisonous.  Alcohol  is  a  disor- 
ganized substance  out  of  sugar.  Sugar  is  nutritive,  and  there  are  some 
chemists  who  assert  that,  because  alcohol  contains  some  of  the  elements 
of  sugar,  alcohol  must,  therefore,  be  nourishment.  Upon  that  principle, 
nitric  acid  is  nourisment,  for  nitric  acid  has  more  nitrogen  in  it  than  has  beef- 
steak, and  the  nourishment  in  beefsteak  is  contained  in  the  nitrogen,  and  our 
food  is  valuable  in  its  nutritive  property  in  proportion  to  the  nitrogen  it  con- 
tains. Nitric  acid,  then,  upon  that  principle,  would  have  more  nourishment 
than  beefsteak ;  but  the  difference  between  the  two  is,  that  in  beefsteak  God 
has  made  the  food  beefsteak  from  the  food  which  the  ox  ate,  and  it  is  ready  for 
the  blood, — ready  to  be  converted  into  blood, — whereas  in  nitric  acid  the 
elements  are  disorganized.  This  principle  runs  through  the  whole  system 
of  nutrition.  If  you  take  a  grain  of  wheat  and  analyze  it,  you  will  find  that 
it  contains  all  the  elements  that  are  in  the  human  system.  The  plant  has  the 
power  to  take  up  out  of  the  earth  that  which  is  just  adapted  to  the  require- 
ments of  the  human  system  ;  but,  if  the  wheat  is  disorganized  as  it  is  in  the 
production  of  alcohol,  it  becomes  a  poison. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  There  are  scientific  gentlemen  who  differ  from  you 
in  your  opinion  as  to  the  nutritive  property  of  alcohol,  are  there  not  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  any  gentleman  has  differed  with  me  in  opinion 
who  has  given  the  attention  to  the  subject  that  I  have. 

Q.  But  there  is  a  difference  of  opinion  between  gentlemen  connected  with 
the  medical  profession  and  yourself? 

A.  I  do  not  know  that  there  is.  I  do  not  believe  that  any  man  will  come 
to  me  and  say  that  he  can  put  into  the  human  system  one  particle  of  iron,  or 
one  particle  of  alcohol,  or  one  particle  of  anything  else  which  is  not  made 
through  the  natural  processes  which  God  instituted. 


APPENDIX.  825 

Q,  I  should  like  to  inquire  if  everything  goes  through  the  vegetable  crea- 
*<on,  as  you  state  ? 

4.  Yes,  sir,  through  the  vegetable  organization  out  of  the  dust  of  the 
earth. 

Q.     Is  the  atmosphere  made  out  of  the  vegetable  organization  ? 

A.     That  is  not  nutriment. 

Q.  Has  not  the  atmosphere  inhaled  by  the  lungs  as  much  to  do  in  making 
up  the  blood  of  the  human  being,  as  food  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir  ;  but  it  is  not  nutrition. 

Q.  Then  the  aliment  taken  from  the  atmosphere  does  not  come  from  the 
vegetable  world  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  But  an  aliment  comes  out  of  the  atmosphere  that  is  necessary  to 
system  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir.     So  there  is  an  aliment  in  nitric  acid. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  WILLIAM  E.  CURRIER. 

Q,     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  reside  in  Newburyport,  do  you  not  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  hold  any  office  there  ? 

A.     I  am  Justice  of  the  Police  Court  at  the  present  time. 

Q.  You  understand  the  question  at  issue  here  to  be  between  the  prohibitory 
law  and  the  license  system.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  give  your  views 
upon  the  subject  ? 

A.  I  am  here  and  asked  to  give  my  opinion  in  favor  of  the  present  pro- 
hibitory law  now  upon  the  statute  book,  and  I  think  that  that  law  if  properly 
executed  can  suppress  the  sale  of  spirituous  liquors.  We  have  had  a  very 
liberal  state  of  affairs  in  Newburyport  in  relation  to  the  sale  of  liquor  for  the 
last  twenty  years,  and  liquor  has  been  sold  there  almost  as  freely  as  all  kinds 
of  merchandise,  notwithstanding  the  laws  we  have  had  upon  the  statute  book, 
because  our  City  Government  has  always  been  in  favor  of  a  liberal  construc- 
tion of  the  law.  Consequently  intemperance  has  increased  there  from  time 
to  time  until  the  last  year.  Within  the  last  year  an  effort  has  been  made  to 
suppress  the  sale  of  liquor  by  the  execution  of  the  present  law.  I  might  say 
that  for  nearly  twenty  years  past  nearly  every  grocer  in  that  city  has  sold 
liquor  as  freely  as  any  other  kind  of  merchandise.  Bar-rooms  have  been 
increased  from  time  to  time.  Since  the  1st  of  January,  1866,  the  effort  has 
been  made  to  stop  the  sale,  and  every  public  bar-room  known  has  been  closed. 
Grocers,  I  think,  have  stopped  the  sale  of  liquor  entirely.  I  do  not  know  of 
any  person  who  sells  liquor  openly  in  Newburyport  to-day.  And  the  reason 
of  the  suppression  of  the  sale  is  owing  to  the  more  vigorous  enforcement  of  the 
present  law.  There  has  been  no  difficulty  thus  far  in  enforcing  it  and  sup- 
pressing the  sale.  The  records  of  the  police  court  show  that  within  six  or 
eight  months  there  has  been  a  continual  increase  of  intemperance  and  arrests 
for  drunkenness  ;  but  since  the  efforts  of  the  State  Constabulary  to  suppress 
the  sale  of  liquor,  the  arrests  have  fallen  off  more  than  fifty  per  cent.  I  am 
inclined  to  think  that  to-day  there  is  not  one-fourth  part  of  the  liquor  sold 
privately,  or  in  any  other  way,  that  was  sold  eighteen  months  ago ;  and  ] 
104 


826  APPENDIX. 

attribute  the  decrease  wholly  to  the  efforts  made  by  the  State  Constabulary 
to  enforce  this  law. 

Q.     Do  you  refer  to  arrests  for  all  kinds  of  crime,  or  only  for  drunkenness  ? 

A.  For  drunkenness  alone.  I  notice  in  looking  over  the  records  of  the 
court,  less  than  one-half  as  many  persons  have  been  arrested  for  the  last 
quarter  as  were  arrested  for  the  first  quarter  of  1866  ;  and  there  were  less 
arrests  for  the  last  quarter  of  1866  than  there  were  for  the  last  quarter  of  the 
year  1865.  I  think,  so  far  as  my  judgment  goes,  that  the  law  could  be 
executed  with  us  without  much  difficulty. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  Have  y6u  been  a  friend  of  the  law,  and  hoped 
much  from  it  from  the  beginning  ? 

A.  I  have  never  taken  an  active  part  in  it.  Under  the  statute  of  1852, 
the  Mayor  and  Aldermen  of  Newburyport  appointed,  during  the  years  1854 
to  1860,  as  many  agents  to  sell  liquor  as  they  saw  fit,  and  nearly  every  grocer 
and  apothecary  in  the  city  had  a  license  to  sell.  Liquor  has  been  sold  there 
until  within  the  last  few  months  as  freely  as  it  has  ever  been  sold  in  Boston. 
The  commencement  of  the  efforts  of  the  State  Constabulary  to  enforce  the 
law  was  about  eighteen  months  ago,  and  they  have  pursued  their  efforts  up  to 
the  present  time,  so  that  now  the  sale  is  almost  suppressed.  I  do  not  know 
that  it  is  wholly  suppressed.  There  may  be  places  where  it  is  sold  privately, 
but  I  think  that  a  stranger  in  Newburyport,  to-day,  would  not  be  very  likely 
to  find  any  liquor. 

Q.  Were  the  hotels,  as  well  as  the  grocers  and  apothecaries,  licensed  under 
the  former  law  by  your  Mayor  and  Board  of  Aldermen  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     What  year  was  that  ? 

A.     I  think  from  1854,  but  I  will  not  be  positive. 

Q.     Before  this  law  was  enacted  ? 

A.  I  will  not  be  positive  whether  hotels  were  licensed  or  not,  but  every 
respectable  grocer  was  appointed  an  agent  under  the  law  for  the  sale  of  liquor 
— not  under  this  law,  but  under  the  law  of  1852. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  What  is  the  sentiment  of  a  majority  of  the  people 
of  Newburyport  upon  this  question  ? 

A.     The  people  are  about  equally  divided.     ' 

Q.  One-half,  then,  are  opposed  to  the  prohibitory  law,  and  the  other  half 
in  favor  of  it  ? 

A.     I  should  think  so. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  the  present  law  can  be  enforced  in  Newburyport, 
so  that  there  will  be  no  sale  whatever  in  the  city  ? 

A.  I  think  it  may  be  executed  so  as  to  suppress  the  sale  of  liquor  as  much 
as  thieving  and  other  crimes  are  suppressed. 

Q.     Can  you  suppress  it  so  that  there  will  be  no  public  sale  ? 

A.     I  think  so. 

Q.  Can  you  suppress  all  private  sale  ?  Will  there  not,  in  spite  of  all  the 
efforts  of  the  Constabulary,  still  be  private  sales  ? 

A .     There  may  be. 

Q.  Is  it  not  true  that  in  Newburyport  there  are  now  private  sales,  so  that 
anybody  who  desires  liquor  can  get  it  ? 


APPENDIX.  827 

A.    Not  to  my  knowledge. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  anybody  fails  to  get  a  bottle  of  wine  who  has  been 
in  the  habit  of  drinking  it,  because  of  the  enforcement  of  the  law  ? 

A.     I  think  they  find  it  difficult  to  get. 

Q.  Do  you  expect,  by  the  execution  of  this  law,  to  bring  about  a  condi- 
tion of  affairs  in  Newburyport  in  which  nobody,  however  accustomed  to  the 
use  of  liquor  heretofore,  will  longer  use  it  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  I  think  there  are  many  people  in  Newburyport  that,  if  they 
wanted  wine  or  brandy,  or  any  other  liquor,  would  import  it,  if  they  could  not 
get  it  in  any  other  way.  There  are  some  who  import  for  their  own  use  at 
the  present  time. 

Q.  Is  it  less  wrong  for  them  to  import  than  it  is  for  any  man,  who  cannot 
afford  to  import,  to  buy  his  liquor  there  ? 

A.     I  do  not  wish  to  judge  of  that. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  expected,  under  the  operation  of  this  law,  to  see  the 
time  when  the  drinking  of  liquor  will  be  entirely  suppressed  ? 

A.    No,  sir,  nor  under  any  other  law  ? 

TESTIMONY  OP  KEY.  WILLARD  SPAULDING. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MINER.)     Of  what  church  in  Salem  are  you  the  pastor  ? 

A.     Of  the  First  Universalist  Church. 

Q.  Will  you  state,  as  briefly  as  you  can,  the  views  you  have  formed  upon 
the  question  here  at  issue  ? 

A.  I  do  not  believe  in  a  license  law ;  I  think  it  wrong  in  principle ;  I  do 
not  think  that  it  could  be  put  into  execution  ;  I  do  not  think  that  the  parties 
who  are  licensed  can  or  will  execute  the  law  against  the  men  who  are 
unlicensed.  I  am  quite  confident  that  the  temperance  people,  in  general, 
would  not  undertake  to  execute  a  law  which  they  believe  to  be  wrong  in 
principle.  I  do,  however,  believe  in  the  prohibitory  law.  I  think  it  can  be 
executed  in  Salem  and  in  every  other  city  of  the  Commonwealth,  and  I 
believe  that  this  is  coming  to  be  the  opinion  of  a  great  many  of  our  liquor- 
dealers.  They  do  not  agree  with  us  upon  many  points,  but  they  seem  to  be 
coming  to  the  conclusion  that  the  prohibitory  law  is  to  be  executed  against 
them  or  upon  them.  I  think  if  thorough  work  were  made  in  executing  the 
law  in  Boston  that  we  could  execute  it  a  great  deal  easier  in  Salem  ;  but  we 
are  not  without  hope  that  our  liquor-shops  will  be  closed  up  whatever  may  be 
the  case  here  in  Boston.  I  know  of  some  neighborhoods  that  want  the  pro- 
hibitory law  upon  the  statute  book  and  want  it  enforced  for  their  own  salva- 
tion. A  week  or  two  ago  I  was  sent  for  to  go  to  the  lock-up,  and  found  there 
a  man  with  whom  I  was  acquainted.  This  was  on  Monday  morning  that  I 
was  called  to  the  place.  He  was  taken  up  on  Saturday  for  drunkenness  in 
the  street.  He  was  tried  on  Monday  morning  and  fined,  and  was  to  be  car- 
ried to  jail.  That  man  told  me,  on  my  questioning  him,  that  he  could  not 
endure  temptation ;  that  when  he  came  to  town  on  Saturday  he  was  deter- 
mined not  to  go  near  a  liquor-shop,  but  when  he  came  to  town  he  could  not 
resist  the  temptation  and  was  drawn  to  his  old  places.  I  paid  his  fine  and  the 
costs  and  he  signed  the  pledge,  but  the  next  week  he  was  drunk  in  Salem 
again.  The  very  first  time  that  he  visited  the  place  after  my  paying  the  fine 
he  was  drunk  in  the  streets  again.  He  is  an  example  of  a  large  class  of  men. 


828  APPENDIX. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  think  that  the  temperance  people  would  not 
enforce  a  law  that  they  thought  to  be  wrong  in  principle  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  temperance  men,  in  general,  have  no  faith  in  a  license 
law. 

Q.  They  think  it  is  wrong  in  principle,  and  therefore  make  no  effort  to 
enforce  it  ? 

A.     That  is  my  opinion. 

Q.  Do  you  justify  other  people  who  believe  that  the  prohibitory  law  is 
wrong  in  principle  in  making  no  attempt  to  enforce  it? 

A.  I  believe  that  men  who  have  no  faith  in  the  prohibitory  law  are  not 
likely  to  seek  to  enforce  it. 

Q.  I  asked  you  if  you  would  justify  a  man  who  did  not  approve  of  the 
principles  of  the  prohibitory  law  from  making  any  effort  to  enforce  it  ? 

A.  Perhaps  I  ought  to  have  stated  that  temperance  men,  in  general,  have 
no  faith  in  the  practical  results  of  a  license  law. 

Q.  That  is  not  answering  my  question.  You  said  that  temperance  men 
did  not  approve  of  the  principle  of  a  license  law,  and  therefore  would  make 
no  effort  to  enforce  it.  Now,  I  ask  you,  if  you  would  justify  a  man  opposed 
to  the  principle  of  the  prohibitory  law  from  making  any  efforts  to  enforce 
that  law  ? 

Q.    I  believe  that  temperance  men  have  very  little  faith 

Q.     Can  you  not  answer  that  question  ? 

A.  I  believe  that  temperance  men  have  very  little  faith  in  the  principle  of 
a  license  law. 

Q.  I  am  talking  about  a  prohibitory  law.  I  ask  you  the  question  if  you 
would  justify  a  man,  who  has  no  faith  in  the  principle  of  a  prohibitory  law,  in 
not  making  any  effort  to  enforce  it  ? 

A .  I  should  not  expect  them  to  make  voluntary  efforts  for  the  enforcement 
of  a  law  in  which  they  had  no  faith. 

Q.     But  would  you  justify  them  in  not  making  any  effort  to  enforce  it. 

A.  I  might,  perhaps,  justify  them  in  their  not  making  any  effort  to  enforce 
a  law  in  whose  principle  and  in  whose  practical  operation  they  had  no  faith. 
I  do  not  think,  under  a  license  law,  there  would  be  proper  men  appointed  for 
its  enforcement,  or  men  who  were  really  seeking  to  execute  the  law 
thoroughly. 

Q.  You  say  that  there  would  not  be  proper  men  appointed  under  a  license 
law.  Does  not  that  depend  entirely  upon  the  people  of  Salem  ?  Could  not 
the  appointing  power  appoint  suitable  persons  to  carry  out  the  law  ? 

A.  I  do  not  believe  that  a  man  who  sells  ardent  spirits  as  a  beverage  will 
faithfully  carry  out  any  license  laws  that  may  be  enacted.  That  is  my 
opinion.  I  may  be  wanting  in  faith  in  humanity,  but  I  have  very  little  faith 
in  that  portion  of  humanity  that  is  engaged  In  the  liquor  traffic. 

Q.  You  do  not  think  that  a  man,  under  a  license  law,  can  sell  liquor  and 
be  an  honest  man  ? 

-4.  No,  sir;  or  if  he  is  an  honest  man  he  is  a  very  poorly  instructed  one. 
If  he  is  honest  and  continues  in  the  sale,  I  think  that  he  cannot  have  an 
educated  conscience. 

Adjourned. 


APPENDIX.  829 


TWENTY-THIRD    DAY. 

FRIDAY,  March  29, 1867. 

The  Committee  met  at  9  o'clock,  A.  M.,  and  the  hearing  of  testimony  on 
behalf  of  the  Remonstrants  was  continued. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  JOHN  W.  OLMSTEAD,  D.  D. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Are  you  the  editor  of  the  Christian  Watchman 
and  Reflector  1 

A.    I  am. 

Q.  You  know  the  question  at  issue  here.  It  is  the  preference  between 
the  prohibitory  law  and  a  license  law.  We  will  be  obliged  to  you  if  you  will 
state  your  views  upon  that  point  ? 

A .  I  have  views  and  opinions  which  are  the  result  of  some  observation  and 
experience.  I  have  served  nine  years  as  the  pastor  of  churches,  and  twenty- 
one  years  in  my  present  relation.  During  these  twenty-one  years,  I  have 
lived  in  Chelsea,  Roxbury,  Framingham  and  Boston.  I  have  been  led  in  pur- 
suance of  my  calling  into  a  great  number  of  pulpits  in  Massachusetts.  In 
Roxbury,  up  to  1865, 1  had  lived  some  thirteen  years.  During  ten  of  those 
years,  I  was  in  the  service  of  the  school  committee ;  for  two  years  I  was 
Chairman  of  the  Board,  which  led  me  over  the  city,  and  into  the  schools  in 
all  parts  of  the  city.  My  observations  led  me  to  the  conclusion  that  intem- 
perance, so  far  from  having  increased,  had  been  steadily  and  surely  on  the 
the  decrease  ;  and  during  my  fifteen  months  or  more  residence  in  Boston  at 
the  South  End  in  Ward  Eleven,!  think  I  have  marked  less  and  less  of  drunk- 
enness, and  less  and  less  of  men  intoxicated  upon  the  sidewalks.  The  point 
that  I  would  seek  to  raise  is,  that  the  licensing  of  anything  of  itself  of  a  per- 
nicious influence  must  be  wrong  in  principle ;  and  although  prohibitory  laws 
may  not  have  been  brought  into  efficient  operation,  yet  .all  past  history  proves 
that  whatever  may  have  been  the  shortcomings  of  prohibition,  the  licensed  sale 
of  intoxicating  drinks  is  an  immorality,  and  that  it  can  be  no  more  regulated 
than  you  can  regulate  a  conflagration. 

Q.     Have  you  any  further  views  that  you  would  like  to  express  ? 

A.     That  embraces  all  that  I  have  to  say. 

Q.  What  has  been  your  observation  about  the  country  as  to  the  practical 
effect  of  the  present  law  ?  Are  you  not  aware  that  in  a  great  many  places  a 
great  deal  has  been  done  to  suppress  and  diminish  and  root  out  the  traffic  in 
intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.  I  remember  having  once  passed  a  Sabbath  in  the  town  of  Graflon,  in 
this  State,  and  I  was  told  that  there  it  was  not  possible  for  a  man  to  get 
intoxicating  drink.  I  think  I  have  been  witness  of  the  fact  that  in  many 
localities  out  of  Boston  the  operation  of  the  prohibitory  law  has  been  effectual 
to  that  end. 


830  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Has  it  not,  in  your  judgment,  operated  in  this  way,  that  the  sale  of 
liquor  has  been  so  suppressed  and  rooted  out  about  the  country  that  it  has 
driven  a  great  portion  of  the  dissolute  and  hard-drinking  class  into  the  city, 
so  that  while  intemperance  has  been  decreasing  in  the  country,  for  that 
reason  it  may  not  have  decreased  in  the  city  ? 

A.  Of  course  intemperance  and  all  its  abettors  would  naturally  find  a 
nestling  place  in  Boston  when  driven  from  the  country. 

Q.  Have  you  looked  over -the  plan  which  has  been  presented  by  the 
petitioners  of  the  law  which  they  propose  to  have  enacted  ? 

A.  I  have  seen  nothing  except  that  it  is  proposed  to  license  the  sale  of 
intoxicating  drinks  as  a  beverage. 

Q.  Their  plan  is  to  permit  the  municipal  authorities  of  cities  and  towns 
to  license  or  not  as  they  please  the  keepers  of  hotels,  victuallers,  grocers  and 
apothecaries.  How  a  victualling-shop  can  be  much  short  of  a  bar,  or  a 
regular  grog-shop,  I  do  not  understand.  I  would  like  to  know  what  would 
be  your  judgment  of  the  operation  of  such  a  law  which  left  to  each  munici- 
pality to  determine  for  itself  the  question  of  license.  For  instance,  here  is 
a  cluster  of  half  a  dozen  towns  in  the  country  which  do  not  want  a  license 
and  refuse  to  grant  them,  but  in  the  centre  of  that  half  dozen  country  towns 
there  may  be  one  town  which  determines  to  grant  licenses,  and  thus  offer  to 
the  people  of  those  half  dozen  surrounding  towns  the  continual  temptation  to 
buy  and  use  liquor.  Do  you  think  that  such  a  law  would  be  just  in  its  opera- 
tion ? 

A.     I  should  think  that  it  would  be  very  inequitable  and  wrong. 

Q.    Would  you  not  think  that  it  would  defeat  the  object  of  the  law  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  In  effect,  under  such  a  system,  would  it  not  be  possible  to  have  as  many 
different  laws  in  the  State  as  there  are  towns  in  the  State,  and  to  alter  those 
laws  every  year  ;  and  would  it  therefore  not  be  opposed  to  our  idea  of  equal 
laws  ? 

A.  I  should  think  so  if  the  matter  is  as  you  have  stated  it.  I  do  not  think 
that  such  a  law  would  be  practicable  or  feasible,  and  I  think  that  the  history 
of  such  legislation  in  the  past  is  against  the  policy  of  licensing. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  If  I  understand  you  rightly  you  regard  it  as  an 
immorality  to  license  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.  Yes.  sir.  I  consider  that  the  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks  as  a  beverage 
is  an  immorality. 

Q.  Does  the  question  of  this  immorality  depend  upon  the  use  which  is  to 
be  made  of  the  liquor  after  it  is  sold  ?  You  say  that  the  licensing  is  an 
immorality.  Did  you  mean  to  say  that  you  get  at  the  immorality  of  licensing 
by  the  use  that  the  liquor  is  put  to  after  it  is  sold  ? 

A.  I  will  re-state  my  statement.  I  think  that  the  licensed  sale  of  intoxi- 
cating drinks  as  a  beverage  is  an  immorality,  and  that  it  becomes  such  by 
necessity. 

Q.    What  do  you  mean  by  a  beverage  ? 

A.     I  used  the  term  in  its  ordinary  acceptation. 

Q.  Do  you  include  the  use  of  intoxicating  drinks  for  medicinal  purposes 
when  sold  upon  the  prescription  of  a  physician  ? 


APPENDIX.  831 

A.  I  mean  all  such  use  as  is  not  recognized  under  the  present  prohibitory 
law  as  proper.  I  understand  that  the  present  prohibitory  law  allows  its  use 
under  a  wise  regulation. 

Q.     What  is  the  regulation  ? 

A .  The  regulation  I  understand  to  be  that  it  is  to  be  sold  only  by  agents 
regularly  appointed  throughout  the  State,  and  this  only  for  medicinal  and 
mechanical  purposes. 

Q.  That  relates  to  the  sale  of  it  by  the  town  agents.  They  have  the 
right  to  sell  it  for  medicinal  purposes  and  for  the  arts  and  for  nothing  more. 
Do  you  think  that  if  a  license  were  granted  that  permitted  the  sale  of  wine 
and  intoxicating  liquors  for  family  or  culinary  purposes  and  not  for  a  bever- 
age, that  such  a  sale  would  be  an  immorality  ? 

A.    I  do  not  see  how  that  could  be  done. 

Q.  That  is  not  answering  the  question.  The  question  is,  would  it  be,  if 
it  was  contained  in  a  license  law,  an  immorality  ? 

A.  I  think  if  you  mean  by  family  and  culinary  purposes  to  include  the 
idea  of  a  beverage 

Q.  I  do  not.  I  mean  to  use  liquor  for  culinary  purposes,  as  the  ladies  use 
it  for  pudding-sauce,  for  brandy-peaches,  for  mince-pies  and  for  jellies.  Do 
you  mean  that  the  selling  of  it  for  such  a  use  would  be  an  immorality  ? 

A.     I  do  not  understand  what  that  has  to  do  with  the  matter  before  us. 

Q.  The  Committee  is  to  decide  whether  the  question  is  a  proper  one  or 
not,  and  not  the  witness.  If  they  consider  it  an  improper  question  they  will 
check  me. 

A.  I  do  not  feel  that  I  am  called  upon  to  answer  questions  that  go  all  over 
casuistry.  I  feel  that  I  am  called  upon  to  testify  upon  the  subject  of  a  license 
law,  and  I  propose  to  keep  myself  to  that  subject.  I  do  not  suppose  that  I 
abrogate  all  my  rights  in  coming  here.  I  come  to  be  interrogated  upon  a 
certain  subject ;  but  if  I  can  see  the  bearings  of  your  question  to  the  subject, 
I  will  answer  it. 

Q.  It  is  not  the  prerogative  of  a  witness  to  say  whether  he  will  or  will  not 
answer  a  question  ;  nor  is  it  for  him  to  say  whether  a  question  is  or  is  not  rel- 
evant to  the  subject.  The  witness  comes  here  to  tell  the  truth.  You  have 
said  that  the  licensing  of  the  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks  as  a  beverage  was  an 
immorality.  I  ask  you  now  if  it  is  an  immorality  to  license  the  sale  of  intox- 
icating liquor  to  be  used  for  culinary  purposes  and  not  for  a  beverage  ? 

A.  I  am  not  prepared  to  answer  the  question  as  it  is  now  submitted,  and 
as  it  stands  in  my  mind.  • 

Q.  If  you  cannot  form  an  opinion  whether  that  would  be  an  immorality 
or  not,  will  you  be  good  enough  to  state  the  basis  upon  which  you  arrive  at 
the  opinion  that- it  is  an  immorality  to  license  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.  My  answer,  comprehensively,  is  that  in  the  light  of  all  licensed  sale  of 
intoxicating  drinks  for  the  last  fifty  years,  crime,  in  a  very  large  majority  of 
cases  may  be  traced,  directly  or  indirectly,  to  this  cause. 

Q.     Traced  to  what — the  licensing  ? 

A.  To  the  sale  of  intoxicating  drinks  as  a  cause,  either  directly  or  indi- 
rectly at  least,  in  my  comprehension  of  the  matter.  If  I  recollect  rightly,  the 
statement  has  been  made  here  during  the  present  week  by  the  Chaplain  of 


832  APPENDIX. 

the  State  Prison,  that  a  great  majority  of  the  convicts  in  the  prison  were 
brought  there  by  the  use  of  intoxicating  drinks.  Of  course  it  would  require 
a  long  time  to  go  into  the  citation  of  evidence  and  facts  by  which  I  reach  this 
conclusion  ;  but  it  is  just  as  settled  a  conclusion  in  my  mind  as  any  other. 

Q.  You  regard  then  the  sale  of  liquor  as  the  cause  of  crime  resulting  from 
intemperance  V 

A.    I  cannot  separate  the  cause  from  the  effect. 

Q.    Is  it  the  only  cause  of  crime  ? 

A.    I  have  not  claimed  that  it  is  the  only  cause,  but  the  chief  cause. 

Q.  The  chief  cause  then,  you  say,  of  crime  and  misery  resulting  from  the 
use  of  intoxicating  liquors,  is  the  sale  of  that  liquor, — do  you  mean  to  say  that 
the  sale  is  the  chief  cause  ?  Is  there  no  other  instrumentality  that  helps  to 
produce  that  mischief  besides  the  sale  ? 

A.  The  sale  involves  my  view  of  that  ancient  woe  of  Holy  Writ, — "  Woe 
to  him  that  putteth  the  bottle  to  his  neighbor's  month."  It  involves  that. 

Q.  Now  again,  I  ask  you  if  the  sale  of  a  gallon  of  liquor  is  the  chief  cause 
of  the  evils  of  drunkenness  which  it  produces — do  you  mean  to  say  .that? 

A.     I  do  not  understand  the  question. 

Q.  You  stated  that  the  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  is  the  chief  cause  of 
intemperance  and  the  crime  resulting  from  intemperance.  You  understand, 
I  suppose,  what  cause  means  in  reference  to  an  effect,  and  what  a  chief  cause 
means  with  reference  to  an  effect.  Now  do  you  mean  to  say  that  a  sale  of 
liquor  is  the  cause  of  intemperance  and  crime  ? 

A.    I  cannot  separate  the  cause  from  the  effect. 

Q.  Is  there  any  other  cause  producing  intemperance  but  the  sale,  to  your 
knowledge  ? 

A.  I  have  admitted  in  saying  that  the  sale  is  the  chief  cause  that  there 
are  other  tributary  influences. 

Q.     Will  you  tell  what  those  other  tributary  influences  are  ? 

A.  There  may  be  in  certain  constitutions  a  strong  natural  tendency  to 
drink — a  craving  for  drink.  I  believe  in  depravity.  I  believe  that  men  are 
depraved,  and  that  there  is  a  going  away  from  God  and  holiness  in  the  nat- 
ural heart ;  and  in  some  men  there  is  a  strong  tendency  and  craving  in  the 
direction  of  strong  drink,  and  therefore  the  woe  to  which  I  referred  becomes 
emphasized  in  its  aggravation  and  wickedness. 

Q.  Does  the  drinking  of  intoxicating  liquors  have  anything  to  do  with  the 
intemperance  that  it  produces  ? 

A.    Necessarily  it  does. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  any  sale  of  intoxicating  liquors  would  produce 
any  trouble  if  the  liquor  was  not  drank  ? 

A.     Of  course  not. 

Q.  Is  not  the  drinking  of  liquor  one  of  the  causes  that  produces 
intemperance  ? 

A.     Of  course,  I  understand  that. 

Q.  Now,  then,  if  there  was  no  drinking  at  all,  would  there  be  any  wrong 
coming  from  the  sale  ?  If  it  was  never  drank  as  a  beverage,  would  there  be 
any  immorality  in  the  sale  ? 

A.     I  am  unable  to  answer  that  question. 


APPENDIX.  833 

Q.  You  stated  that  in  your  opinion  it  was  an  immorality  to  license  the  sale 
of  intoxicating  liquors  as  a  beverage.  But  suppose  that  the  license  should  be 
granted  and  the  liquor  never  sold,  and  the  liquor  never  drank,  but  used 
entirely  in  the  arts,  would  there  be  any  immorality  in  licensing  the  sale  in 
that  case  ? 

A.  I  can  say  that  if  the  use  was  restricted  in  the  way  you  state  that  there 
would  not  be. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say,  as  a  teacher  of  Christian  morality  and  of  ethics, 
you  can  predicate  the  idea  of  immorality  upon  the  licensing  ?  The  licensing 
itself  does  no  hurt  unless  liquor  is  sold,  and  the  sale  does  no  hurt  unless  it  is 
drank  and  wrong  comes  from  the  drinking.  Thus  you  see  the  licensing  is 
removed  three  degrees  back  from  the  act  which  results  in  crime  or  misery. 
Now  do  you  undertake  to  predicate  upon  the  remote  act  of  licensing  the 
question  of  the  morality  of  the  use  of  liquor  ? 

A.  My  conclusion,  as  I  endeavor  to  give  it,  is,  that  the  licensing  of  the 
sale  of  intoxicating  drinks  as  a  beverage  becomes  by  necessity  an  immorality. 

Q.  Carry  this  thing  one  step  further  back.  Would  any  evil  come  from 
the  sale  of  liquor,  or  the  licensing  of  the  sale  of  liquor,  if  it  was  not  only  not 
used  as  a  beverage,  but  God  had  so  made  the  appetites  of  men  that  they  could 
not  use  it? 

A.    I  am  not  prepared  to  answer  that  question. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  BENJAMIN  EVANS. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  know  the  question  here  at  issue ;  it  is  the 
question  between  a  prohibitory  law  and  a  license  law.  We  should  like  to 
have  your  opinion  upon  that  question. 

A.  1  am  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory  law  and  opposed  to  a  license  law.  One 
of  my  reasons  for  being  in  favor  of  a  prohibitory  law  is,  that  it  has  not  had  a 
fair  trial ;  that  it  has  but  recently  been  generally  considered  constitutional. 
In  the  place  in  which  I  live — the  town  of  Salisbury — and  in  Amesbury,  since 
1835,  there  has  been  an  increase  of  intemperance  up  to  perhaps  the  last  year. 
Since  1855  it  increased  until  the  close  of  the  war,  and  since  that  time  it  has 
decreased.  I  mean  that  there  has  been  an  apparent  increase,  but  not  a  real 
increase.  There  has  been  an  increase  of  population.  Perhaps  some  fifty  or 
seventy  per  cent,  of  that  increase  in  population  has  been  almost  exclusively  of  a 
foreign  character.  Those  men  of  foreign  birth  have  brought  with  them  their 
drinking  customs,  and  hence  there  has  been  an  increase  of  intemperance.  My 
own  experience  the  past  year  as  trial  justice  in  that  place  is  this :  that  out 
of  fifty-one  cases  that  have  come  before  me,  forty -six  of  them,  directly  or  indi- 
rectly, were  attributable  to  the  use  of  intoxicating  drinks ;  and  that  of  the 
fifty-one  persons,  thirty-seven  were  foreigners.  In  that  connection  I  may 
state  here,  that  looking  over  the  police  reports  of  Boston,  I  find  that  wherever 
there  is  that  increase  of  foreign  population  there  is  also  an  increase  of 
intemperance  and  an  increase  ofj  crime;  but  among  the  American  pop- 
ulation it  appears  to  me  that  the  drinking  customs  of  the  people  have 
been  rather  on  the  decrease  than  the  increase.  In  looking  over  the  statis- 
tics of  the  Boston  police  report,  I  find  that  of  the  17,954  persons  who  were 
brought  up  before  the  courts,  twenty-six  per  cent,  of  them  were  born  in  the 
105 


834  APPENDIX. 

United  States,  and  sixty-six  per  cent,  in  Ireland  and  eight  per  cent,  were  of 
other  nationalities.  I  find  of  the  lodgers  who  were  not  brought  before  the 
courts  and  tried,  numbering  19,579,  that  sixty-five  per  cent,  were  foreign  and 
thirty-five  per  cent,  were  of  the  United  States.  I  find  also  by  these  statistics 
that  there  has  been  a  decrease  of  the  number  of  liquor-shops  in  Boston  during 
the  last  year  of  197. 

Q.     During  what  period  ? 

A.  During  last  yean  By  the  police  report  of  Boston,  there  is  a  decrease 
of  liquor-shops  of  197.  Of  the  1,515  places  remaining  open,  thirteen  per 
cent,  are  wholesale.  I  think  if  you  look  at  other  cities  where  there  is  a 
foreign  population,  we  shall  find  the  same  ratio  holding  true — that  the  crime 
and  those  who  are  arrested  for  drunkenness  are  mostly  those  of  the  foreign 
population.  About  a  year  ago,  I  saw  in  a  paper,  or  in  some  document,  that 
Hon.  Linus  Child  said  that  some  three-quarters  of  all  the  crime  and  pauper- 
ism of  the  Commonwealth  was  directly  or  indirectly  traceable  to  intemperance. 
That  led  me  to  an  investigation  in  regard  to  pauperism.  On  looking  over  the 
statistics  of  the  Board  of  State  Charities,  I  ascertained  that  to  each  and  to  every 
man,  woman  and  child  in  the  Commonwealth,  there  was  a  tax  of  SI. 76  for  the 
support  of  paupers.  I  find,  in  looking  over  the  statistics  of  the  different  insti- 
tutions of  the  State  for  the  support  of  pauperism,  that  the  cost  of  pauperism 
and  crime  to  the  State  during  the  last  year,  amounted  to  $1,237,000.  Of 
course  not  all  of  that  is  attributable  to  intemperance.  I  find  that  by  some 
authorities  as  much  as  nine-tenths  of  the  pauperism  and  crime  are  chargeable 
to  intemperance.  I  think  the  statement  of  the  Chaplain  of  the  State  Prison 
is  that  three-fourths  are  attributable  to  that  cause.  One  witness,  I  think,  said 
that  ninety-nine  hundredths  could  be  attributed  to  intemperance  which,  I 
think,  is  the  largest  percentage  I  have  heard  mentioned.  I  find,  on  looking 
at  the  report  of  the  opening  argument  of  the  hearing  before  this  Committee, 
that  it  was  admitted  here  that  there  were  5,474  places  in  the  Commonwealth 
licensed  by  the  United  States  authorities  to  sell  intoxicating  drinks.  After 
one  or  two  paragraphs,  I  find  that  the  honorable  gentleman  admits  that  that 
was  probably  not  one-half  the  number  of  places  in  the  city  that  were  selling 
liquor.  He  estimated  that  each  place  sold  twenty  glasses  per  day  on  the 
average.  Taking  that  estimate  at  ten  cents  per  glass,  it  would  come  to  over 
eight  millions  of  dollars.  If  we  had  that  eight  millions  of  dollars,  and  four  mil- 
lions which  is  estimated  as  the  cost  of  crime  and  pauperism  resulting  from  the 
use  of  that  liquor,  we  have  an  aggregate  of  twelve  millions  of  dollars.  Besides 
this,  there  are  other  costs  which  might  be  reckoned  in,  such  as  the  loss  of  time, 
the  loss  of  productive  labor,  and  the  loss  to  the  resources  of  the  Commonwealth, 
not  only  of  those  who,  by  their  drinking  customs  lose  their  time,  but  of  those 
who  are  manufacturing  and  retailing  this  article.  Then  there  are  other  costs, 
such  as  the  loss  by  fire,  the  loss  by  sea,  etc.,  which  result  from  the  use  of 
liquor.  I  think  that  I  have  mentioned  some  of  the  material  losses  that  occur 
from  this  cause,  to  say  nothing  of  the  mental  and  moral  anguish  which  it  pro- 
duces in  the  Commonwealth.  I  am  satisfied  in  my  own  mind,  from  what  little 
observation  I  have  had  of  license  laws,  that  a  license  law  would  not  be  any 
more  enforced  than  the  prohibitory  law ;  that  those  who  find  an  excuse  now 
for  violating  the  law,  would  also  find  the  same  excuse  for  violating  a  license 


APPENDIX.  835 

law.  I  think  that  we  have  a  right  to  infer  that  from  the  opening  address  of 
the  honorable  gentleman  before  the  Committee.  He  estimates  that  the  num- 
ber of  licensed  places  is  only  one-half  the  number  that  sell ;  and,  if  all  the 
assessors  in  the  State  manifested  as  much  vigilance  as  the  assessor  in  our 
district,  where  it  is  pretty  difficult  for  the  sellers  to  escape  his  notice,  the  num- 
ber of  persons  selling  must  be  very  great.  It  appears  to  me  that  there  would 
be  more  difficulty  in  getting  evidence  under  a  license  law  than  there  now  is 
in  enforcing  the  prohibitory  law. 

Q.  Suppose  that  the  license  law  was  enforced  against  the  unlicensed,  what 
particular  good  would  it  do  when  so  many  were  licensed  ? 

A.  I  think  that  it  would  not  have  any  good  effect.  A  gentleman  who  is  a 
member  of  the  Senate,  Mr.  Choate,  was  in  New  York  a  short  time  since,  at 
one  of  the  licensed  hotels.  He  asked  the  bar-keeper  whether  he  was  licensed 
or  not.  He  said  that  he  was.  He  asked  him  if  he  or  his  associates,  who 
were  licensed,  attempted  to  break  up  the  sale  of  liquor  by  those  who  were 
unlicensed,  or  had  any  detectives  to  watch  for  such  purpose.  He  replied  in 
the  negative.  As  an  illustration,  he  referred  Mr.  Choate  to  a  party  across  the 
street  who,  he  said,  sold  four  times  as  much  liquor  as  himself,  but  who  had  no 
license,  and  still  was  not  interfered  with  at  all.  I  was  talking  with  a  gentle- 
man from  Maine  the  other  day,  and  he  said  that,  when  they  had  a  license  law 
in  Maine,  as  many  unlicensed  men  sold  as  licensed. 

[Mr.  ANDREW  declined  to  cross-examine  Mr.  Evans  upon  the  part  of  the 
Petitioners,  by  reason  of  his  being  a  member  of  the  Executive  Council, 
and  believing  the  examination  of  members  of  the  executive  department 
before  Legislative  Committees,  on  questions  of  public  policy,  to  be  dangerous  in 
precedent,  and  embarrassing  to  the  Executive.] 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  OTIS  CLAPP. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  are  one  of  the  United  States  Assessors,  are 
you  not  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  The  laws  of  the  United  States  require  that  a  man,  in  order  to  sell 
intoxicating  liquors  in  any  way,  should  pay  for  a  license  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  that  license  authorizes  them  to  sell  only  in  conformity  to  the  laws 
of  the  State,  but  any  sale  for  the  past  few  years  has  been  in  opposition  to  the 
State  laws.  I  want  to  know  whether,  in  your  district,  those  who  were  sup- 
posed to  be  engaged  in  selling  got  a  United  States  license  ? 

A.  They  did.  I  am  the  Assessor  of  the  Fourth  District,  which  embraces 
the  old  Wards  1,  2,  3,  5,  6  and  9  of  Boston,  Cambridge,  Chelsea,  North  Chel- 
sea and  Winthrop,  which  is  also  the  Congressional  District.  It  is  the  Fourth 
Collection  District.  In  that  district  in  1864,  before  the  law  establishing  State 
Constables  went  into  effect,  there  were  1,235  licenses  gran  ted  by  the  United 
States.  In  1866,  there  were  477,  being  a  diminution  of  758.  The  1 ,235 
licenses  were  granted  before  the  State  Constabulary  were  in  operation.  The 
effective  operation  of  the  Constabulary  force  diminished  the  number  of  licenses 
in  the  district  758,  between  1864  and  '66. 


836  APPENDIX. 

Q.  And  you  attribute  this  diminution  almost  exclusively  to  the  vigorous 
enforcement  of  the  law  ? 

A.  I  attribute  it  entirely  to  the  action  of  the  State  Constabulary.  I  had 
a  good  deal  of  conversation  with  some  of  my  assistants  in  reference  to  this  at 
that  time.  Old  Ward  No.  1,  now  No.  2,  embraces  what  is  called  the  "  Black 
Sea,"  or  North  Street.  The  diminution  in  the  number  of  licenses  there  was 
nearly  100.  The  "  Black  Sea  "  embraces  all  kind  of  dance  houses  and  stores, 
where  both  large  and  small  quantities  were  sold.  The  Assessor  of  that  district 
is  quite  an  energetic  man,  and  feeling  a  good  deal  of  interest  in  the  matter — 
feeling,  as  all  assessors  do,  a  natural  pride  in  letting  nothing  escape  taxation — 
he  has  followed  up  and  watched  the  progress  of  things,  and  he  tells  me  that 
he  thinks  that  the  amount  of  liquor  sold  is  diminished.  He  thinks  that  there 
is  but  little  liquor  sold  in  the  places  that  declined  to  take  a  license,  and  that, 
for  the  most,  those  who  declined  to  take  a  license  have  given  up  the  traffic. 
The  same  may  be  said  of  East  Boston.  In  East  Boston  there  were  53  licenses 
in  1866  and  128  in  1864,  and  of  those  53  many  of  them  only  sold  beer.  For 
instance,  there  are  those  who  keep  eating-houses  who  only  sell  beer,  but  they 
have  to  pay  the  same  license  for  selling  beer  as  for  selling  distilled  spirits. 
My  assistant  has  made  it  a  particular  point  to  watch,  and  he  thinks  that  the 
sale  of  liquor  has  not  increased,  but,  on  the  contrary,  rather  decreased. 

I  have  been  requested  by  some  parties  connected  with  this  investigation,  and 
by  some  disconnected  with  it,  to  prepare  some  figures  upon  the  general  subject, 
with  regard  to  the  quantity  of  spirits  distilled,  the  quantity  consumed  and  its 
expense,  in  a  variety  of  ways.  I  have  prepared  a  few  figures,  which,  if  the 
Committee  will  indulge  me,  I  will  read. 

I  would  like  to  remark,  in  the  first  place,  that  some  dozen  years  ago  I 
became  connected  with  what  was  called  the  "  Black  Sea"  Mission,  or  Union 
Mission,  of  which  Father  Mason  was  the  missionary  and  Judge  Russell  the 
president.  That  brought  me  in  connection  with  missionary  operations,  in  what 
we  call  the  "  Black  Sea."  In  1859  I  became  connected  with  the  Washing- 
tonian  Home,  and  with  other  institutions  that  have  to  do  with  intemperance, 
consequently  it  has  formed  my  mind  upon  this  matter.  I  would  like  to  say 
further,  that  I  have  never  had  much  to  do  with  the  law.  I  have  never  studied 
it  particularly ;  but  I  have  been  identified  with  the  movement  of  moral 
suasion.  That  has  been  my  position  heretofore.  In  looking  at  this  matter, 
my  mind  was  struck  with  a  remark  of  Edward  Livingstone,  in  the  Louisiana 
Code,  in  regard  to  the  prevention  of  crime,  as  follows : — 

u  As  prevention  in  a  disease  of  the  body  is  less  painful,  less  expensive  and 
more  efficacious  than  the  most  skilful  cure,  so  in  the  moral  maladies  of  society 
to  arrest  the  vicious  before  the  profligacy  assume  the  shape  of  crime.  An 
offence  perpetually  incurs  the  loss  sustained  by  its  commission,  and  frequently 
of  its  repetition  added  to  the  expense  of  its  punishment.  To  prevent  an 
offence  requires  only  the  previous  expense  of  education  and  refinement." 

Judge  Sprague  made  a  point  in  this  hall  at  the  time  the  question  was  up  in 
regard  to  the  fifteen  gallon  law.  I  was  here  and  heard  his  argument,  and 
was  very  much  struck  with  what  he  said.  He  said  that  moral  suasion  should 
be  largely  in  advance  of  the  law,  but  that  the  law  must  follow  it  along  in 
order  to  sustain  what  had  been  gained.  The  law  was  to  act,  as  it  were,  like  a 


APPENDIX.  837 

ratchet  wheel  and  hold  fast  what  was  gained.  He  instanced  the  case  of 
slavery  as  showing  that  in  earlier  years  the  universal  sentiment  was  that 
slavery  would  die  out ;  and  so  firm  were  our  forefathers  in  the  conviction  that 
this  would  be  the  case,  that  they  omitted  to  prevent  its  extension  by  law,  and 
the  consequence  was  that  opinions  went  back  again,  and  hence  our  desolating 
war  has  been  the  consequence.  I  happened  to  be  present  a  year  and  a  half  ago 
at  the  great  temperance  convention  at  Saratoga  Springs.  Ex-Governor 
Buckingham  and  Ex-Governor  Dutton,  of  Connecticut,  were  present,  and 
many  other  distinguished  men.  They  had  a  very  free  and  friendly  discussion. 
Governor  Dutton's  idea  was  that  the  temperance  men  themselves  were 
responsible  for  the  non-execution  of  the  law  in  Connecticut.  That  was 
amplified  in  various  ways.  They  had  discontinued  their  efforts ;  they  had 
stood,  as  it  were,  back  to  some  extent,  and  let  the  law  take  care  of  itself. 
The  consequence  was  that  evil  had  resulted.  I  mention  that  merely  as  a 
fact  in  the  case. 

1  go  now  to  an  estimate  which  Senator  Wilson  recently  made  in  a  speech 
which  he  delivered  in  a  temperance  society  in  Washington.  It  is  in  regard 
to  the  number  of  the  army  of  drunkards.  That  army,  he  said,  consists  of  five 
hundred  thousand  persons,  and  fifty  thousand  of  that  number  die  annually,  so 
that  the  army  would  be  extinct  in  ten  years  were  it  not  increased  yearly  by 
the  addition  of  fifty  thousand.  I  have  prepared  some  figures  to  show  the  loss 
to  the  productive  interest  of  the  country  by  the  deaths  of  those  fifty  thousand 
per  year.  According  to  the  statement  of  Mr.  Hawkins,  a  reformed  inebriate 
of  Baltimore,  the  average  age  of  drunkards  is  twenty-four  years,  and  the 
maximum  age  twenty-seven  years.  That  rule  applied  to  all  his  early  asso- 
ciates. According  to  the  English  insurance  tables,  which  essentially  agree, 
the  prospect  of  life  at  the  age  of  twenty-seven  (which  is  the  maximum  age  of 
the  drunkard,)  is  twenty  and  three-tenths  years.  Now  if  the  lives  of  this 
army  of  fifty  thousand  men  could  be  prolonged  twenty  years,  and  they  should 
earn  upon  the  average  two  dollars  per  day,  it  would  amount  to  the  incredible 
sum  of  seventy-three  hundred  millions  of  dollars  in  all — nearly  three  times  our 
national  debt.  If  they  could  be  prolonged  even  ten  years,  one-half  the  aver- 
age prospect  of  life  at  that  age,  their  contribution  would  pay  the  national 
debt  and  leave  a  thousand  millions  over  for  other  purposes.  There  is  another 
element  which  should  enter  into  this  estimate,  which  is  the  loss  of  labor  by 
preventable  sickness.  A  few  years  ago  the  British  House  of  Commons 
appointed  a  commission  to  investigate  that  subject,  and  the  Earl  of  Carlyle 
was  the  Chairman  of  that  Commission.  His  estimate  was  that  the  annual 
loss  to  the  people  of  Great  Britain  by  preventable  sickness  was  one  hundred 
millions  of  dollars.  When  I  saw  this  statement  years  ago,  it  struck  me  that 
the  loss  in  this  country  by  the  same  cause  could  not  be  less  than  a  hundred 
millions  of  dollars  per  year.  Now  that  preventable  sickness  in  this  country  is 
largely  owing  to  intemperance.  This  impresses  upon  me  most  profoundly  with 
the  necessity  of  putting  agencies  in  operation  that  shall  have  for  their  object 
the  prevention  of  this  sickness  and  the  consequent  loss  to  the  country ;  and 
my  idea  of  prevention  is  mainly  by  moral  means,  but  the  law  must  come  in 
also  and  harmonize  with  it.  A  great  enemy  of  man  is  the  intoxicating  element  of 
fermented  liquors.  It  was  given  for  a  blessing,  and  is  turned  into  a  curse.  An 


838  APPENDIX. 

example  may  be  taken  in  the  city  of  New  York.  There  are  more  than  one- 
half  of  the  population  of  that  city  that  live  in  tenement  houses  and  in  cellars. 
Their  main  social  and  spiritual  comfort  is  in  inebriation.  They  are  almost 
beyond  religious  influence.  How  the  Church  and  State  can  think  of  this  mass 
of  humanity  without  alarm  and  without  some  greater  effort  to  change  that  ten- 
dency is  one  of  the  marvels  of  the  time.  The  reason  that  I  am  so  profoundly 
impressed  by  these  facts  is  that  I  have  been  in  the  habit  for  ten  or  a  dozen 
years  past  of  going  through  the  "  Black  Sea  "  and  Five  Points  and  witness- 
ing face  to  face  this  gigantic  evil.  The  question  arises,  Where  do  the  recruits 
for  this  army  of  drunkards  come  from  ?  The  answer  must  be — From  the 
ranks  of  the  moderate  drinkers.  The  problem  in  my  mind  to  be  solved  is 
how  shall  we  diminish  the  number  of  recruits.  My  answer  is  by  moral  suasion, 
and  the  law  working  in  harmony  with  it.  What  moral  suasion  has  accom- 
plished in  the  past  can  best  be  seen  by  looking  back  to  the  day  when  Justin 
Edwards  was  identified  with  the  temperance  movement.  In  a  letter  from 
him  to  the  Emperor  of  Russia,  he  says  that  more  than  seven  thousand  societies 
have  been  formed  with  more  than  one  million  two  hundred  thousand  mem- 
bers ;  that  more  than  three  thousand  distilleries  have  been  stopped,  and  more 
than  seven  thousand  dealers  have  given  up  the  traffic.  Now  in  my  judgment 
those  were  the  efforts  that  need  to  be  revived  at  the  present  time.  We  want 
a  revival  of  that  kind  of  movement. 

Few  persons  appreciate  the  burdens  borne  by  the  community  caused 
directly  or  indirectly  by  intemperance.  The  State  has  expended  in  the 
construction  of  sixteen  institutions  since  1815,  $2,366,728  ;  and  for  current 
expenses  for  nineteen  institutions,  $5,166,344,  making  in  all,  over  seven  and 
a  half  million  of  dollars.  It  is  estimated  that  from  fifty  to  sixty  per  cent,  of 
this  expenditure  is  caused  directly  or  indirectly  by  intemperance.  In  addition 
to  this,  the  cost  of  prisons  in  the  State,  as  given  in  the  report  of  the  Board 
of  Charities,  is  two  millions  of  dollars,  and  the  cost  of  jails  and  houses  of 
correction  for  the  year  1866,  is  8271,670.  The  almshouses  in  the  State  have 
cost  $1,725,985.  The  paupers  for  the  year  1866  cost  8757,778.  That 
estimate  is  exclusive  of  the  State  almshouses,  which  are  valued  at  $520,000, 
and  for  the  year  1866  cost  $213,000.  The  private  charities  of  the  State 
are  estimated  at  one  and  a  half  millions  of  dollars.  Now  of  all  this  expense, 
from  fifty  to  eighty  per  cent,  is  to  be  attributed  directly  or  indirectly  to  intem- 
perance. 

The  question  consequently  arises,  How  can  we  best  prevent  drinking  habits  ? 
This  question  is  now  being  agitated  in  Europe.  In  a  recent  letter  by  "  Bur- 
leigh"  to  the  Boston  Journal,  he  speaks  of  organizations  now  going  on  in 
Europe  having  for  their  object  the  reform  of  the  people  in  this  respect.  He 
says  — 

"  The  questions  of  reform  now  agitate  England.  Great  efforts  are  made 
to  benefit  the  workmen.  The  chief  amusements  are  got  up  under  the  lead 
of  prominent  men  to  elevate  and  keep  workmen  from  ale  and  similar  houses. 
On  Saturday  nights  cheap  amusements  are  held.  Humorous  and  comic  plays 
arc  acted  and  songs  sung,  and  all  are  admitted  at  a  penny  a  head.  Penny  read- 
ings are  got  up  for  the  same  end  in  chapels,  and  the  attendance  is  good.  On 
Sundays  the  halls  and  circuses  and  theatres  are  opened  for  worship  and  lay- 
men hold  forth  to  crowds  of  attentive  hearers  from  the  lower  walks  of  life." 


APPENDIX.  839 

I  was  gratified  to  learn  that  in  New  York  they  were  attempting  similar 
movements  with  similar  objects.  It  has  been  gratifying  to  me  to  see  the 
movement  that  has  been  inaugurated  of  opening  our  theatres  and  having  our 
popular  preachers  hold  forth  in  them  on  Sunday  evenings.  I  have  taken 
the  ground  for  some  time  in  the  temperance  society  to  which  I  belong  that 
if  they  wish  to  keep  men  from  forming  intemperate  habits  they  have  got  to 
take  up  this  question  and  provide  cheap  amusements  for  the  people  discon- 
nected from  dangerous  surroundings.  I  hope  that  all  the  places  of  amuse- 
ment in  Boston  will  be  occupied  upon  Sundays,  not  with  their  usual 
play?,  but  with  instruction  of  .a  moral  and  elevating  character. 

Q.  I  want  to  ask  you  about  those  United  States  licenses.  They  were 
reduced  from  some  twelve  hundred  to  less  than  five  hundred,  were  they  not  ? 

A.  The  number  of  licenses  in  my  district  were  reduced- to  four  hundred 
and  seventy-seven. 

Q.  It  will  be  said,  I  suppose,  on  the  other  side,  that  all  who  sell  do  not 
take  licenses  now,  and  that  they  then  took  them  because  they  trusted  they 
would  protect  them  from  the  State  laws.  But  there  are  heavy  penalties  now 
existing  against  the  men  pursuing  that  business,  without  taking  out  a  license  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Some  men  are  very  vigilant,  I  suppose,  in  ferreting  out  places  that  sell 
without  a  license.  It  is  their  duty  to  do  so,  and  the  income  of  the  govern- 
ment depends  very  much  upon  their  vigilance,  does  it  not  V 

A.  The  main  feature  is  just  as  this  :  if  any  person  finds  that  there  is  a 
place  open  and  selling  liquor  without  a  United  States  license,  and  wants  to 
make  the  informer's  profit,  he  has  only  to  go  in  and  get  one  or  two  drinks  of 
ale,  pay  for  it,  go  out  and  go  into  the  United  States  Court  and  enter  a  com- 
plaint, and  he  gets  his  share  of  the  profit.  It  is  a  pretty  dangerous  thing  for 
any  person  to  sell  without  a  United  States  license. 

Q.  You  are  satisfied,  then,  that  there  are  but  very  few  who  do  sell  without 
a  license  ? 

A.  I  cannot  state  from  my  personal  knowledge,  but  that  is  what  my 
assistants  say,  and  it  is  their  duty  to  be  in  the  street  constantly. 

Q.     They  satisfy  you  that  such  is  the  case  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  I  cannot  doubt  the  fact. 

Q.     What  time  of  the  year  do  they  take  those  licenses  ? 

A .  They  date  from  the  first  of  May.  Usually  they  have  commenced  taking 
applications  in  the  month  of  March  :  but  the  law  has  been  changed  lately. 

Q.     How  many  have  been  taken  this  month? 

A.  We  have  just  began  to  take  applications  for  licenses.  The  law  was 
altered  upon  the  second  of  March,  and  we  have  not  yet  gone  far  enough  to 
form  any  opinion  of  the  number  that  will  be  taken. 

An  institution  was  formed  within  the  last  two  years  called  the  "  Home  for 
Little  Wanderers."  It  received  within  two  months  over  twelve  hundred  chil- 
dren. Of  these  six  hundred  and  sixty-nine  were  given  up  to  be  put  in  places. 
One-half  of  those,  it  is  estimated  by  the  Superintendent,  were  brought 
to  that  condition  through  intemperance.  Five  hundred  and  thirty-one  chil- 
dren have  been  received  as  day  children.  They  are  fed,  and  clothed,  and 
instructed,  while  their  mothers  go  out  at  work  for  the  day.  It  is  estimated 


840  APPENDIX. 

i 

that  from  eight  to  nine-tenths  of  this  class  of  children  have  been  brought  to 
that  condition  by  intemperance. 

The  question  of  insanity  and  idiocy  caused  by  the  use  of  spirituous  liquors 
is  worthy  of  consideration.  "  Intemperance,"  said  Dr.  Carpenter,  "  is  the 
most  potent,  and  aggravates  the  operation  of  all  other  causes."  Wine-drinking 
produces  insanity.  Dr.  Tyler,  the  physician  of  the  Somerville  institution  goes 
into  that  question  in  his  report,  and  states  that  he  never  had  so  many  calls  as 
during  the  last  year,  for  this  class  of  cases — insanity  caused  by  intemperance. 
The  cases  he  referred  to  were  principally  those  of  young  men  who  had  been 
made  insane  by  the  free  use  of  wine. 

Mental  debility  in  offspring  is  another  result  of  intemperance.  Of  these, 
Plutarch  says,  "  One  drunkard  begets  another."  Aristotle  says,  "  Drunken 
women  bring  forth  children  like  unto  themselves."  Dr.  Carpenter  quotes 
from  Dr.  S.  G.  Howe's  report  on  Idiocy,  made  to  our  Legislature,  that  the 
habits  of  the  parents  of  three  hundred  idiots  of  Massachusetts  were  learned, 
and  nearly  one-half  of  those  parents  were  known,  to  be  habitual  drunkards. 
In  one  case  referred  to  by  Dr.  Carpenter,  where  the  parents  were  both  drunk- 
ards, there  were  seven  idiotic  children.  '  I  mention  this  to  show  the  dangers 
that  beset  us  in  this  direction  from  intemperance. 

Dr.  Macnish,  superintendent  of  the  lunatic  hospital  in  Dublin,  says  that 
one-half  the  cases  in  that  hospital  are  caused  by  intemperance.  The  physician 
of  a  lunatic  hospital  in  London  puts  the  number  at  forty-one  per  cent.  Dr. 
Carpenter,  after  speaking  of  the  effect  upon  procreation  in  a  state  of  intoxica- 
tion, adds :  "  There  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  the  monomania  of  inebriety 
not  only  acts  upon  and  renders  more  deleterious  whatever  latent  tendency 
may  exist,  but  vitiates  or  impairs  the  sources  of  health  for  several  generations." 
This,  it  strikes  me,  is  an  illustration  of  the  declaration  of  the  Decalogue,  that 
the  iniquities  of  the  fathers  are  visited  upon  the  children  to  the  third  and 
fourth  generations.  Another  result  of  intemperance  that  I  have  noticed  is  its 
effect  upon  the  duration  of  life.  The  statistical  tables  prepared  for  life  insur- 
ance companies  show  the  advantages  of  sobriety.  In  England  the  average 
number  of  deaths  at  forty  years  of  age  is  thirteen  in  a  thousand,  and  of  the 
insured  it  is  eleven  in  a  thousand.  For  all  ages  between  fifteen  and  seventy, 
the  average  number  of  deaths  is  twenty  in  a  thousand.  In  the  Temperance 
Provident  Institution,  after  an  experience  of  eight  years  upon  several  thou- 
sand policies,  the  average  number  of  deaths  was  found  to  be  but  six  in  a 
thousand,  or  about  one-third  of  the  general  average,  and  less  than  one-third 
of  the  whole  average.  The  quantity  of  spirits  consumed  is  almost  fabulous. 
According  to  the  report  of  the  commissioners,  of  \vhich  Mr.  Wells  is  chair- 
man, there  was  manufactured,  in  1860,  ninety  millions  of  gallons  of  distilled 
liquor.  The  amount  required  to  meet  the  consumption  was  forty-five  million 
of  gallons.  Of  this,  thirty-nine  million  of  gallons  was  required  for  drinking 
purposes,  and  six  million  of  gallons  for  the  industrial  arts.  Of  ale  and  lager 
beer  there  were  six  million  of  barrels,  or  one  hundred  and  ninety-two  million 
of  gallons  manufactured.  This  was  all  used  for  drinking  purposes.  The 
increase  in  that  report  is  estimated  at  ten  per  cent.  This,  with  the  amount 
imported,  leaving  out  the  domestic  wines  and  cider,  is  about  two  hundred  and 


APPENDIX.  841 

forty  millions  of  gallons,  or  about  eight  gallons  for  each  man,  woman  and 
child.  At  this  rate,  every  family  of  twelve  persons  would  require  three  barrels 
of  liquor. 

Q.     Do  you  include  the  ale  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  ale  is  liquor,  and  it  is  intoxicating  liquor.  The  valuation  of 
Boston  in  1866,  was  $415,362,345.  The  value  of  the  liquor  interest  is  esti- 
mated at  forty  million  dollars,  or  nearly  one-tenth  of  the  entire  valuation.  I 
mention  that  fact  to  show  that  society  seems  to  be  burdened,  and  its  moral, 
social  and  material  interests  thrown  backward  by  the  perversion  of  so  large  a 
portion  of  this  interest. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  You  attribute  what  you  suppose  to  be  the  reduc- 
tion in  the  number  of  persons  selling  liquors  in  your  collection  district,  to  the 
activity  of  the  State  Constabulary  ? 

A.     It  is  my  impression  that  it  is  owing  to  their  efforts. 
Q.     During  what  period  of  time  ? 

A .  Before  and  after.  I  compared  the  licenses  granted  before  they  com- 
menced their  labors  with  those  taken  afterwards. 

Q.    You  compared  the  year  1864  with  the  year  1866  ? 
A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     And  what  day  in  1864  did  you  compare  with  what  day  in  1866  ? 
A.     I  compared  the  licenses  granted  for  the  year  commencing  May  1st, 
1864.     Of  course  it  would  run  into  a  part  of  1865,  and  the  licenses  granted 
for  1866  would  include  part  of  those  granted  for  1867. 
Q.     From  what  date  in  1866  do  you  estimate  V 
A.     I  estimate  from  May  to  May. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  the  case  of  the  Commonwealth  against 
Maguire,  on  the  1st  of  May,  1866,  which  has  been  recently  decided  in  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  in  favor  of  the  Commonwealth  of  Massa- 
chusetts, upsets  all  the  value  or  the  formerly  supposed  value  of  the  United 
States  licenses  as  a  protection  for  the  seller  against  the  action  of  the  State 
authorities  ? 

A.     I  am  aware  that  there  was  a  decision. 

Q.  And  are  you  not  aware  that  that  was  the  particular  question  discussed 
and  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  only  a  short  time 
before  the  1st  of  May  ? 

A.  That  brings  to  my  mind  that  the  decision,  if  I  recollect  rightly,  came 
before  we  began  to  grant  licenses,  or  about  the  time,  and  that  there  was  an 
impression  among  some  of  the  assessors  that  the  sellers  would  decline  taking 
licenses,  and  they  did  delay  to  some  extent.  In  New  York  they  declined  to 
tak  e  licenses,  but  afterwards  reconsidered  it  and  procured  them. 

Q.     Do  you  not  know  that  if  a  man  takes  a  license  from  the  United  States 
to  sell  liquors  and  then  undertakes  to  sell  them  contrary  to  the  law  of  Massa- 
chusetts, that  the  mere  fact  of  his  having  taken  a  license  from  the  United  States 
is  one  means  by  which  the   State  Constabulary  or  other  persons  are  able  to 
detect  and  discover  the  sale,  and  that,  therefore,  people  desiring  to  sell  in 
secret  have  the  strongest  of  motives  not  to  have  one  of  those  licenses  if  you 
would  give  it  to  them  ? 
A.     Those  matters  were  all  discussed. 
106 


842  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  it  operated  upon  most  of  the  people  in  that 
way? 

A.  It  may  have  operated  upon  a  few  in  that  way,  but  I  do  not  think  that 
it  did  upon  many. 

Q.  You  referred  to  an  estimate  made  by  Senator  Wilson  in  a  temperance 
meeting  in  Washington? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  both  Senator  Wilson  and  Speaker  Colfax  both 
stated  in  that  meeting  that  there  had  never  been  so  temperate  a  Congress — 
that  there  never  had  been  such  comparative  sobriety  among  the  people  of 
Washington  during  the  years  that  they  had  been  there  as  there  was  during 
the  present  Congress  and  at  the  present  time  ? 

A.     I  am  aware  of  that,  and  believe  that  it  was  true. 

Q.  You  do  not  understand  that  there  is  any  prohibitory  law  prevailing  in 
the  District  of  Columbia  at  the  present  time,  do  you  ? 

A.    No,  sir;  I  do  not. 

Q.  Now,  please  to  state  again  the  estimate  made  by  Senator  Wilson  of  the 
number  of  persons  dying  annually  because  of  intemperance  in  the  United 
States  ? 

A.     Fifty  thousand. 

Q.    Do  you  know  how  he  reached  that  conclusion  ? 

A.    I  do  not. 

Q.     Did  he  give  tne  details  ? 

A.     He  did  not  in  that  speech. 

Q.     Did  he  give  any  authority  for  the  statement  ? 

A.    He  did  not  at  the  time  that  he  made  the  statement. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  take  any  pains  to  analyze  that  statement  or  to  prove  the 
assertion  that  he  made  ? 

A.     1  never  have. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  examined  the  statistics  of  mortality  in  this  country  in 
order  to  see  how  far  such  an  estimate  as  that  is  borne  out  by  the  statistics 
actually  returned  by  the  sworn  officers  of  the  United  States  ? 

A.  I  have  never  gone  over  the  statistics  with  particular  reference  to  that 
subject. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  how  many  persons  in  the  United  States  now 
annually  die  of  delirium  tremens,  which  is  the  drunkard's  disease  peculiarly  ? 

A.     That  is  one  of  their  diseases. 

Q.  That  is  one  disease,  I  know,  and  that  is  the  most  prominent  disease. 
How  many,  do  you  suppose,  annually  die  of  delirium  tremens  in  the  United 
States  ? 

A.     I  have  not  the  facts. 

Q.  Out  of  fifty  thousand  deaths  from  intemperance,  what  do  you  think 
would  be  a  fair  proportion  of  the  deaths  by  that  disease  ? 

A.     I  could  not  say. ! 

Q.  Then  you  have  no  idea  about  it  except  what  General  Wilson  gave  at 
the  time  of  the  meeting  ? 

A.    I  have  some  idea  about  it. 

Q.     Then  give  us  your  idea  ? 


APPENDIX.  843 

A.     In  considering  the  subject  frequently 

Q.  Please  answer  my  question.  What  would  be  a  fair  proportion  out  of 
fifty  thousand  cases  caused  by  intemperance,  as  stated  by  Mr.  Wilson,  for 
those  dying  of  delirium  tremens  ? 

A.     I  have  answered  that  question  that  I  do  not  know. 

Q.  Then  I  will  turn  to  another  point.  Have  you  ever  examined  the  tables 
of  mortality  to  see  the  whole  number  of  persons  dying  in  1860  in  the  whole 
United  States,  from  delirium  tremens  ? 

A.     I  have  not. 

Q.  There  were  only  518  men  and  57  women  in  the  whole  country  who 
died  from  delirium  tremens. 

A.     I  have  not  gone  into  that  number,  but 

Q.  How  do  you  understand  the  freedom  of  sale  and  the  consumption  as  a 
beverage  of  the  various  spirits,  wines  and  liquors  in  the  States  of  the  north- 
west as  compared  with  the  States  of  the  north-east  ? 

A.    I  have  not  been  over  that  comparison  particularly. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  there  is  or  is  not  a  greater  freedom  of  sale  and 
use  of  liquor  in  the  north-west  than  there  is  in  the  north-east  ? 

A.  As  I  understand  the  matter,  there  is  very  little  restriction  upon  the 
freedom  of  sale  anywhere,  nor  has  there  been  in  past  times,  except  in  two  or 
three  of  .the  States. 

Q.     Which  two  or  three  States  ? 

A.  In  two  or  three  or  four  of  the  New  England  States — Massachusetts, 
Maine  and  Connecticut. 

Q.  They  are  States  of  the  north-east.  Then  you  consider  that  the  north- 
east relatively  has  more  restrictions  upon  the  sale  and  consumption  of  liquor 
as  a  beverage  than  the  north-west  ? 

A.     The  laws  have  been  more  stringent. 

Q.     Do  the  laws  amount  to  something  or  to  nothing  ? 

A.  In  regard  to  Massachusetts  I  think  they  have  amounted  to  considerable 
in  the  country,  but  to  very  little  in  cities. 

Q.  Although  whiskey  is  freely  made  in  the  north-west,  yet  you  say,  as 
compared  with  the  north-east,  there  is  not  so  much  restriction  upon  the  con- 
sumption and  use.  Do  you  not  know  that  the  deaths  by  delirium  tremens  in 
the  north-east  are  more  than  twice  as  many,  according  to  the  census,  than  the 
deaths  by  the  same  cause  in  the  north-west  ? 

A.  I  think  the  number  of  deaths  by  that  disease  is  small  as  compared  with 
the  whole  number  caused  by  intemperance. 

Q.  But  I  am  looking  now  simply  to  a  comparison  between  the  north-east 
and  the  north-west,  and  I  ask  you  if  you  do  not  know  that,  by  the  census  of 
1860,  the  deaths  by  delirium  tremens  were  twice  as  many  in  the  north-east  as 
in  the  north-west  ? 

A.  My  answer  is  that  I  would  have  very  little  confidence  in  statistics 
where  they  gave  the  number  of  deaths  by  delirium  tremens,  for  the  reason 
that  the  people  wish  to  avoid  the  odium  that  would  attach  to  such  a  death, 
and  would  give  the  disease  some  other  name. 


844  APPENDIX. 

Q.  But  they  are  just  as  likely,  are  they  not,  to  want  to  avoid  the  odium  in 
one  part  of  the  country  as  in  another  ?  I  am  now  calling  your  attention  to  a 
particular  fact. 

A.  I  wish  to  answer  the  question  in  a  manner  which  will  do  my  own  sen- 
timents justice. 

Q.  Then  you  are  not  willing  to  tell  me  whether  you  do  or  do  not  know 
that  relatively  there  is  twice  as  much  of  delirium  tremens  in  the  north-east  as 
there  is  in  the  north-west,  according  to  the  last  census  ? 

A.  I  have  not  based  my  inquiries  ^upon  the  last  census  in  regard  to  that 
matter. 

Q.  You  have  alluded  to  insanity  as  one  of  the  results  of  intemperance. 
How  many  deaths  by  insanity  do  you  suppose  were  returned  according  to  the 
census  of  1860  ? 

A.     I  have  not  the  number  in  my  memory  just  at  this  time. 

Q.  There  were  three  hundred  in  1860,  and  four  hundred  and  fifty-two  in 
1862.  Have  you  any  idea  of  the  proportion  of  deaths  by  insanity  in  the  north- 
east as  compared  with  the  number  of  deaths  by  insanity  in  the  north-west  ? 

A.     I  have  not. 

Q.  Would  you  be  surprised  to  learn  that,  according  to  the  census  in  the 
north-east,  the  proportion  of  deaths  by  insanity  was  eighteen  in  ten  thousand, 
whereas,  in  the  north-west  it  was  "only  nine  in  ten  thousand  ? 

A.  My  answer  to  that  would  be,  that  those  statistics  out  of  New  England, 
where  statistics  are  thought  a  good  deal  of,  are  regarded  generally  by  statis- 
ticians as  very  unreliable. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  these  statistics  are  taken  under  the  carefully 
prepared  laws  of  the  United  States,  by  the  United  States  marshals  and  their 
deputies  in  every  district,  under  carefully  prepared  instructions,  and  returned 
on  blanks  which  are  furnished  by  the  marshals  for  that  purpose? 

A.     I  know  that  perfectly  well,  sir. 

Q.  I  will  take  another  point.  Are  you  aware  that  by  the  same  statistics 
it  is  proved  that  the  ratio  of  deaths  by  old  age  is  seventy-six  per  cent,  greater 
in  the  north-east  than  it  is  in  the  north-west  ? 

A.  I  expect  that  it  would  be  so,  because  the  young  emigrate  to  the  north- 
west and  the  older  stay  at  home. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  young  die  faster  in  the  north-west  than  in  the 
north-east  ? 

A.  The  old  that  die  in  the  north-east  die  there  because  they  have  lived 
there. 

Q.  Yon  have  alluded  to  the  effect  produced  by  the  use  of  wine.  I  will 
call  your  attention  to  one  illustration  of  that.  The  ratio,  in  all  the  United 
States,  of  deaths  by  old  age,  is  stated  by  the  census  to  be  three  hundred  and 
five  in  ten  thousand.  Are  you  aware  how  many  die  in  France  of  old  age  ? 

A.  I  have  not  examined  their  statistics ;  but  for  all  the  statements  that  I 
have  made  I  hold  myself  responsible,  and  can  give  my  authorities. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  there  is  an  item  in  the  census  of  mortality 
that  is  returned  thus :  "  Mortality  from  Intemperance,"  specifically  not  say- 
ing by  delirium  tremens,  but  from  intemperance  ?  Are  you  not  aware  that 
the  census  of  mortality  for  1860  shows  that  there  were  only  nine  hundred  and 


APPENDIX.  845 

thirty-one  in  the  .whole  number  thus  returned,  and  that  the  ratio  of  mortality 
from  intemperance  in  the  north-east  district  is  larger  than  the  ratio  of  mor- 
tality from  intemperance  in  the  north-west  district  ? 

A.  My  answer  to  that  is  that  very  few  persons  are  returned  as  dying  from 
intemperance ;  very  few  persons  in  Boston  go  to  the  City  Hall  and  return  a 
death  as  by  intemperance.  They  return  it  under  some  other  and  medical 
name,  such  as  "  congestion  of  the  brain,"  etc. 

Q.  Then  I  will  take  your  brain  diseases.  Do  you  not  know  that  the  whole 
number  of  persons  who  died'  from  brain  diseases  in  1860  was  only  5,726  in  all 
the  United  States,  and  from  all  causes,  and  that  brain  diseases  are  the  partic- 
ular diseases  most  due  to  intemperance  ? 

A.  That  only  proves  to  me  that  the  deaths  are  put  down  under  other 
names. 

Q.  Take  another  test  then.  Do  you  not  know  that  whereas  there  is  little 
over  two  per  cent,  of  brain  diseases  in  the  north-east,  there  is  only  a  little  over 
one  per  cent,  of  brain  diseases  in  the  north-west  ? 

A.    I  do  not. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  you  think  that  Senator  Wilson's  guess,  based 
upon  no  figures  at  all,  ought  to  be  considered  as  of  more  value  than  the  statis- 
tical returns  of  the  United  States  marshals,  carefully  made,  and  published  by 
the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  and  edited  by  Dr.  Edward  Jarvis  ? 

A.  I  mean  to  say  that  Senator  Wilson's  estimate  was  carefully  made  from 
good  authority,  and  from  statistics  derived  from  a  great  variety  of  sources. 

Q.  I  should  like  to  have  you  give  me  the  statistics  and  an  opportunity  to 
investigate  them  ? 

A.  I  have  not  gone  into  them ;  but  I  have  given  Mr.  Wilson  as  authority, 
and  I  regard  him  as  tolerably  good  authority  in  the  matter  of  statistics. 

Q.  Now,  I  regard  myself  as  tolerably  good  authority  in  the  matter  of 
statistics,  but  I  would  not  undertake  to  make  such  a  statement  to  the  Commit- 
tee on  my  own  authority.  I  have  endeavored  to  call  your  attention,  as  an 
intelligent  witness  and  a  man  of  experience  and  acquainted  with  statistics,  on 
your  honor  as  a  gentlemen,  to  state  the  facts  in  your  possession  to  the  Com- 
mittee, and  not  your  mere  opinions  about  this  subject ;  and  I  ask  you  whether 
you  suppose  that  a  bold  estimate,  sustained  by  nothing  which  we  can  test,  by 
any  gentleman,  is  to  be  compared  with  the  value  of  publicly  prepared  and 
recorded  statistical  information  ? 

A.  I  do  not  understand  that  that  statistical  information  is  reliable  relating 
to  that  point. 

Q.     Relating  to  what  point  ? 

A.     To  this  of  intemperance. 

Q.  But  does  not  the  statistical  information  in  regard  to  mortality  give  us 
the  tabulated  returns  from  the  returns  of  mortality  .from  all  the  known 
causes  ? 

A.  It  does,  under  a  hundred  different  names,  and  probably  of  those  hun- 
dred different  causes,  intemperance  is  an  element  that  enters  into  each. 

Q.  Exactly ;  and  I  called  your  attention  to  the  deaths  by  brain  diseases, 
which  is  a  disease  peculiarly  induced  by  intemperance.  I  called  your  atten- 
tion, also,  to  insanity,  which  is  another  form  of  disease  induced  by  intemper- 


846  APPENDIX. 

ancc.  Just  give  me  another  disease  induced  by  intemperance,  and  I  will  try 
you  upon  that  ? 

A.  With  regard  to  the  question  of  insanity,  I  took  Dr.  Howe's  statements 
and  statistics,  and  Dr.  Jarvis',  who  has  also  made  statistics  upon  that  point. 

Q.     Where  are  those  statistics  ? 

A.     They  are  in  the  report  to  the  Legislature. 

Q.     I  have  been  reading  Dr.  Jarvis'  statistics  all  along  ? 

A.  Dr.  Jarvis  merely  collated  the  returns  that  were  made.  Drs.  Jarvis 
and  Howe  collected  specific  facts  in  regard  to  idiocy,  and  made  their  report 
to  the  Legislature,  and  I  quoted  from  Dr.  Howe. 

Q.  Is  there  any  statement  or  statistical  information  given  by  Dr.  Howe 
contradicting  any  of  the  statistics  that  I  have  offered? 

A.  I  have  read  from  Dr.  Howe's  statistics,  but  you  do  not  think  that  they 
agree  with  yours. 

Q.  You  alluded  to  the  report  made  by  Dr.  Tyler  for  the  year  1866,  and 
just  printed  by  the  State  Government  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  not  by  the  State  Government,  but  by  the  Massachusetts  General 
Hospital. 

Q.     Have  you  the  document  in  your  hand  ? 

A .     I  have. 

Q.     Which  page  of  the  report  did  you  read  from  ? 

A.     From  pages  32  and  33,  on  excessive  wine-drinking. 

Q.  Did  you  observe  this  passage  upon  page  32 :  "  The  excessive  drinking 
of  wines  and  ardent  spirits  has  brought  insanity  upon  many  persons  during 
the  year.  This  indulgence  seems  to  be  increasing  very  greatly,  and  its  conse- 
quences are  indeed  alarming  ?  " 

A.     I  did  notice  it  particularly. 

Q.  Then  how  do  you  think  that  tends  to  affect  the  opinion  which  you  have 
already  given  in  your  examination  in  chief,  that  there  is  less  consumption  of 
spirits  and  wines  now  than  formerly,  and  that  the  operation  of  the  temperance 
laws  have  induced  a  diminution  of  consumption  ? 

A.     This  is  wine-drinking  and 

Q.    It  is  not  wine  alone,  it  is  wines  and  ardent  spirits. 

A.     This  relates 

Q.     Please  to  answer  my  question. 

A.  I  will  if  you  will  allow  me  to  answer  it  so  that  I  can  make  my  answer 
intelligible. 

Q.  How  do  you  reconcile  this  opinion  of  Dr.  Tyler  that  insanity  from  the 
use  of  ardent  spirits  and  wines  is  increasing,  with  the  opinion  that  you  have 
already  expressed  that  owing  to  prohibitory  laws  the  consumption  of  wines 
and  ardent  spirits  has  diminished  ? 

A.  I  answer  it  in  this  way:  I  spoke  particularly  of  the  "  Black  Sea" 
region,  and  stated  that  the  number  of  licensed  places  had  been  reduced  in 
that  region,  and  the  general  sale  had  decreased.  I  believe  it  has  been  reduced 
in  all  those  places.  In  relation  to  this  wine-drinking,  it  is  young  men  in 
entirely  a  different  sphere  of  life  who  are  mostly  affected  by  it,  and  who  could 
command  drink  at  any  rate  if  it  was  to  be  obtained  anywhere  in  the  United 
States. 


APPENDIX.  847 

Q.  Have  you  ever  taken  pains  to  compare  the  opinion  you  have  formed 
with  the  returns  reported  by  the  police  captains  of  the  several  stations  in 
Boston,  from  time  to  time,  of  the  places  where  liquors  were  sold,  or  believed 
to  be  sold  ? 

A.     Which  opinion  do  you  allude  to  ? 

Q.  Your  opinion  relative  to  the  reduction  of  the  number  of  drinking-places 
in  Boston  ? 

A.     I  have  noticed  their  statements. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  compared  the  returns  made  by  your  officers  with  the 
returns  made  by  the  police  captains  ? 

A.  I  have  had  them  in  mind.  I  cannot  say  that  I  have  compared  them, 
because  they  speak  of  the  whole  city. 

Q.  They  divide  the  city  into  police  districts,  and  each  captain  returns  his 
own  district,  and  you  can  discriminate  between  the  districts  which  are  within 
your  district  and  others,  can  you  not  ? 

A.     The  police  districts  are  not  divided  as  the  assessors'  districts  are. 

Q.    Is  not  East  Boston  by  itself? 

A.     That  may  be. 

Q.  Have  you  ever  compared  the  returns  by  the  police  captains  of  East 
Boston  with  the  returns  made  by  your  officers  ? 

A,     I  have  not. 

Q.  Have  you  made  up  any  statistics  showing  the  number  of  places  licensed 
and  the  number  of  places  in  which  liquor  is  suspected  to  be  sold  without  a 
license  ? 

A.     I  have  the  precise  list  of  places  that  are  licensed. 

Q.  That  is  to  say,  you  have  a  list  of  the  assessments  that  you  have  actually 
made  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  But  you  have  not  prepared  or  had  prepared  any  statistical  reports 
giving  the  number  of  suspected  places  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  act  upon  the  presumption  that  there  are  no  suspected  places  in 
your  district  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  there  are  places  that  we  have  not  yet  reached.  My 
remark  is  that  my  assistant  assessors  are  in  the  street  constantly,  and  it  is 
their  duty  to  hunt  up  these  places. 

Q.     Is  that  their  sole  business — to  watch  the  liquor  trade  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  Have  you  any  assistants  whose  sole  business  it  is  to  watch  the  liquor 
trade  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Then  the  only  information  you  have  upon  that  subject  is  derived  from 
the  reports  made  to  you  by  the  assistant  assessors,  whose  duty  it  is  to  assess 
upon  persons  or  property  generally  ? 

A.    That  is  all. 

Q.  And  you  have  no  detective  police  for  the  purpose  of  searching  out  the 
illicit  and  contraband  trade  ? 


848  APPENDIX. 

A.  We  arc  in  constant  communication  with  all  the  detectives,  when  we 
want  information. 

Q.  I  am  asking  whether  there  is  any  separate  detective  force  whose 
duties  arc  to  ferret  out  that  class  of  persons  ? 

A.  There  is  a  revenue  agent  whose  duty  it  is  to  look  after  all  cases  of  vio- 
lation of  the  law,  but  it  is  of  violations  in  regard  to  manufacturers  and 
incomes  and  spirits. 

Q.     Is  there  an  inspector  ? 

A.     There  is  one  inspector  for  the  district. 

Q.  When  the  police  captains  give  'official  testimony  and  evidence  of 
their  being  a  very  large  number  of  places  where  liquor  is  sold,  and  when 
added  to  that  is  the  testimony  of  the  Catholic  priesthood,  who  penetrate  pro- 
fessionally both  by  night  and  by  day,  all  parts  of  the  city,  and  when  added  to 
that  is  the  testimony  of  various  other  visitors, — all  of  them  arriving  at  the 
same  conclusion  and  stating  the  same  thing, — that  there  is  a  very  large  num- 
ber of  unlicensed  places  where  liquor  is  known  or  suspected  to  be  sold,  do  you 
or  do  you  not  think  the  conclusion  arrived  at,  and  the  testimony  received 
from  all  those  combined  sources,  is  worth  more  than  the  negative  results 
arrived  at  by  your  inspector  and  your  assistants  ?  [Objected  to,  and  question 
withdrawn.] 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  In  relation  to  the  comparative  number  of  deaths 
from  a  given  cause  in  the  north-east,  as  compared  with  the  north-west,  what 
should  you  expect  since  the  young  emigrate  to  the  north-west,  and  since  the 
country  is  quite  new  ? 

A.  That  the  old  people,  for  the  most  part,  remain  in  the  cast,  and  the 
young  people  go  to  the  north-west. 

Q.  Are  the  intemperate,  or  those  in  ill-health,  or  those  lacking  in  enter- 
prise likely  to  remove  to  the  north-west  or  elsewhere  ? 

A.  The  intemperate  are  very  likely  to  be  the  least  active  and  the  least 
stirring. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  How  long  do  you  understand  Ohio  to  have  been 
settled  ?  The  north-western  district  to  which  I  refer  includes  Ohio,  Michigan, 
and  Illinois.  How  many  generations  have  dwelt  in  those  States  ? 

A.  I  think  I  could  answer  that  question  by  saying  that  Ohio  has  been 
settled  from  the  first  day  that  the  boat  floated  down  from  Pittsburg,  but  I  do 
not  know  the  date. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOLER.)  Gov.  Andrew  asked  you  about  the  number 
of  cases  of  delirium  tremens,  and  of  brain  diseases  reported  as  though  they 
were  the  only  ones  caused  by  intemperance.  Do  you  not  know  that  many 
deaths  resulting  even  directly  from  intemperance  are  not  reported  as  being 
caused  by  intemperance,  nor  by  delirium  tremens,  nor  by  congestion  of  the 
brain  ?  Do  you  not  know  that  there  are  innumerable  diseases  resulting  from 
the  exposure  and  poverty  induced  by  intemperance,  which  result  in  death  ? 

A.  I  understand  that  consumption  is  also  caused  by  intemperance,  and 
that  it  also  produces  a  great  variety  of  other  diseases. 


APPENDIX.  849 

TESTIMONY  OF  DAVID  BURSLEY. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  are  High  Sheriff  of  Barnstablc  ? 

A.  I  am.  I  have  been  an  officer  thirty-four  years  and  Deputy-Sheriff 
before  that. 

Q.    You  have  been  an  officer,  in  all,  how  long  ? 

A.     Over  forty  years,  except  five  or  six  years  taken  out  of  the  thirty-three. 

Q.    What  is  the  state  of  temperance  in  your  county  now  ? 

A.    It  is  very  good. 

Q.    Few  places  of  sale  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  of  one  in  the  county. 

Q.    Are  there  secret  sales  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  very  few  indeed.  There  were  some  places  before  the  State 
Constabulary  were  established.  They  have  ferreted  out  those.  I  do  not  know 
of  one  in  the  county  now  where  a  person  could  get  a  glass  of  liquor.  Thirty 
years  ago,  under  the  license  law,  there  were  frequent  sales,  and  numerous 
places  where  you  could  get  it,  where  it  was  not  licensed.  Under  the  license 
law,  after  the  first  year  or  two,  people  took  out  a  few  licenses  and  others  sold 
without  license,  and  it  became  notorious  that  a  license  did  not  have  much 
effect,  and  they  stopped  taking  out  licenses.  There  were  some  prosecutions — 
very  few  indeed — of  those  who  had  not  licenses.  * 

Q.    Not  enough  to  suppress  the  sale  ? 

A.  Not  enough  to  suppress  the  sale.  Our  town  has  always  been  a  very 
temperate  town,  but  more  so  for  the  last  two  years  than  I  have  known  it  in 
my  life  before.  % 

Q.     That  you  attribute 

A.     To  the  Constabulary  force. 

Q.  Do  you  know  how  many  cases  there  have  been  brought  into  the  courts, 
under  the  notice  of  the  police,  in  Barnstable,  in  the  past  year  ? 

A.  There  has  been  a  great  number  brought  in,  but  not  nearly  all  con- 
victed ;  perhaps  not  more  than  half  or  two-thirds  were  convicted  on  account 
of  the  want  of  evidence.  We  have  never  had  any  trouble  in  convicting  by 
reason  of  the  jury,  but  the  trouble  has  been  with  the  evidence. 

Q.     When  the  evidence  is  sufficient,  the  jury  are  ready  to  convict  ? 

A.    Always. 

Q.     How  about  the  number  of  cases  of  drunkenness  ? 

A.    There  have  been  very  few  cases  of  drunkenness ;  very  few  indeed. 

Q.    Have  you  in  your  mind  the  number  for  the  last  year  ? 

A.  I  think  this  last  year  there  has  not  been  but  three  or  four  cases  in  the 
whole  county. 

Q.    What  is  the  population — about  ? 

A.     The  population  is  about  thirty-three  thousand. 

Q.    Do  you  think  it  would  be  a  benefit  to  introduce  a  license  law  ? 

A.  No,  sir,  I  do  not.  If  you  will  take  care  of  Boston,  we  can  take  care  of 
it  down  there.  It  comes  in  from  Boston  in  every  shape  ;  but  there  is  scarcely 
a  man  that  would  go  up  to  a  bar  and  take  a  glass  of  liquor  openly. 

Q.    Are  these  expressmen  ever  prosecuied  ? 

107 


850  APPENDIX. 

A.  No,  sir,  not  to  my  knowledge.  I  have  known  it  to  come  down  in 
barrels  covered  with  hay,  and  marked  as  crockery  ware,  and  I  have  known  that 
it  has  been  liquor  in  casks. 

Q.  How  many  places  have  you  supposed  there  are  in  Barnstable  County 
where  a  person  could  go  in  and  get  liquor  slyly  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  of  any  place.  I  think  the  officers  are  looking  for  such 
places. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  it  will  be  very  unfair  for  towns  in  your  county,  where 
they  might  vote  against  license  themselves,  to  have  a  licensed  town  right 
along  on  the  border  ? 

A.  I  do,  sir.  We  have  thirty-nine  selectmen  in  our  county,  and  I  have 
taken  pains  to  get  their  opinions  in  reference  to  a  license  law,  and  I  doubt 
very  much  if  they  would  pass  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  FAY.)  Had  you  reason  to  suppose  that  these  packages,  that 
came  by  express,  were  to  be  sold  contrary  to  law  ? 

A.  No,  sir.  They  came  to  different  individuals.  For  instance:  four  or 
five  persons  would  club  together,  and  when  the  liquor  gets  down  there,  they 
meet  secretly  and  each  one  takes  his  jug. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Did  you  .ever  see  any  notices  sent  out  by  the 
local  agent,  Hon.  Lev!  Kdfcd,  calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  he  is  authorized 
to  sell  liquors  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  that  I  have  received  one,  or  seen  one. 

Q.     Have  you  ever  heard  of  such  notices  being  sent  out  ? 

A .    I  have.     Some  of  the  Deputies  have  received  such  notices. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  EDWARD  MELLEN. 

Q.    You  reside  in  Wayland  ? 

A.     That  is  my  home,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  a  license  law  would  be  preferable  to  the  present 
prohibitory  law  ? 

A.    I  do  not. 

Q.    How  long  were  you  on  the  bench  of  the  Court  of  Qommon  Pleas  ? 

A.     About  twelve  years. 

Q.     And  you  were  Chief  Justice  how  long  ? 

A.    From  1855  to  1859. 

Q.    You  were  als"o  prosecuting  attorney  at  some  time  ? 

A.     I  was  prosecuting  attorney  for  two  terms  in  Middlesex. 

Q.  How  long  have  you  been  practising  at  the  bar  ;  since  you  commenced, 
1  mean  ? 

A.     Almost  thirty-nine  years. 

Q.    Your  home  is  in  Wayland  and  your  business  is  in  Worcester,  is  it  not  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  The  question  you  put  is  whether  I  recollect  the  operation  of  the 
law  under  the  license  system.  I  do  very  well.  I  recollect  the  license  question 
down  to  1838,  and  then  the  new  license  system  or  fifteen-gallon  law,  the  recol- 
lection of  which  is  very  fresh  in  my  mind  ;  and  in  the  operation  of  that  law,  as 
everybody  is  aware,  licenses  were  given  by  the  County  Commissioners  for 
quite  a  number  of  years  after  that  body  was  elected  ;  and  again  the  license 
flaw  of  1838  w;as  one  that  was  very  much  discussed,  and  the  state  of  public 


APPENDIX.  851 

opinion  was  such  that  juries  were  slow  to  convict.  There  was  in  some  of  the 
counties,  a  practice  among  the  gentlemen  of  the  bar  to  argue  questions  of  law 
to  the  jury,  as  though  the  jury  had  a  right  to  overrule  the  court ;  and  many 
cases  of  acquittal  undoubtedly  were  procured  in  that  way.  I  had  not  the 
honor  of  addressing  one  of  those  arguments  ;  I  declined  always  to  put  to  the 
jury  any  question  of  law  which  had  been  adjudicated.  That  law  existed  for 
a  very  short  time,  and  that,  with  the  opposition  made  to  it,  increased,  undoubt- 
edly, the  consumption  of  liquor.  That  is,  it  was  one  of  the  great  means  by 
which  liquor  was  used  as  a  beverage,  and  I  have  no  doubt  that  that  would  be 
the  result  now,  more  especially,  if,  as  I  understand,  the  licenses  are  to  be 
granted  by  each  town,  as  I  have  heard  it  stated,  though  I  have  not  seen  the 
bill  proposed.  There  would  be  a  trouble  in  regard  to  a  law  of  that  kind,  I 
have  no  doubt,  and  the  trouble  would  be  this.  There  would  be  a  constant 
political  agitation,  no  doubt,  operating  here  for  a  license,  because  it  would  be 
lucrative,  and  keeping  up  political  discussion  from  year  to  year,  and  officers 
being  elected  on  the  ground  that  they  would  or  would  not  license.  I  suppose 
every  man  whose  experience  extends  back  thirty  years  will  remember  how 
this  was  discussed  in  town  meetings  and  how  far  officers  were  elected  undei 
it — som£  of  them  very  good  and  some  not  so  good  ;  and  I  can  see  that  the 
results  would  be  carried  into  the  elections  in  the  same  way  as  in  the  case  ol 
towns,  and  some  persons  would  be  making  bids,  I  suppose,  for  offices.  And  1 
am  sure  it  would  increase  the  sale  of  liquors  as  a  beverage. 

Q.  Does  your  memory  of  the  operation  of  the  license  system  show  thai 
they  were  in  the  habit  of  really  suppressing  the  unlicensed  sellers  effectually ": 

A.     I  think  not. 

Q.  Did  they  not  ordinarily  license  in  the  cities — in  Boston,  for  instance- 
as  you  recollect  the  circumstances  and  the  fact,  as  if  it  was  of  no  particular 
consequence  ? 

A.  I  should  rather  not  give  an  opinion  concerning  that.  It  is  not  so  fully 
in  my  memory  that  it  would  be  entitled  to  much  weight.  I  have  seen  the 
operation  of  the  law  in  your  city,  particularly  after  the  passage  of  the  law  of 
1852  (I  refer  to  the  restrictive  law),  and  its  operation  upon  the  juries.  There 
were  many  difficulties  from  juries  believing  that  they  had  the  right  to  judge 
of  the  law  over  the  instructions  of  the  court.  Under  the  statutes  that  they 
passed  in  the  same  year,  though  the  law  was  before  that  enactment  precisely 
what  it  was  afterwards,  as  expounded  by  the  court,  and  precisely  as  it  was  by 
the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  then ;  and  under  that,  when  the  prosecution  was 
directed  to  convict  for  the  sale  of  liquors,  there  was  a  great  difficulty  in 
getting  an  agreement  of  juries.  Afterwards,  prosecuting  substantially  for 
nuisances,  there  was  no  difficulty. 

Q.  You  believe  it  to  be  practicable  to  enforce  the  present  law,  do  you 
not? 

A.  If  you  mean  stopping  it  entirely,  I  do  not  believe  it.  I  suppose  it  will  be 
diminished  by  the  operation  of  it. 

Q.  You  think  that  it  is  practicable,  and  that  there  have  been  good 
effects  arising  from  it  ? 

A.  I  presume  it  would  be,  sir.  I  have  no  doubt  of  it.  If  you  will  just 
put  your  questions  I  will  answer  them.  I  have  no  theory  to  expom?^  and  I 


852  APPENDIX. 

hare  not  heard  but  a  very  small  portion  of  the  evidence  that  has  been  given 
in -here. 

Q.  Do  you  not  suppose  it  is  practicable  to  get  this  offence  under  about  as 
much  as  you  get  that  of  gambling,  or  some  even  grosser  vices  than  that  ? 

A.  It  is  more  wide-spread  and  addresses  itself  to  a  greater  number  of 
persons.  The  passions  of  more  are  excited  than  in  gambling  or  other  vices  of 
such  a  nature. 

Q.     Well,  proportionately  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  whether  it  might  or  not,  sir.  I  would  say  that  in  refer- 
ence to  one  point,  that  I  have  no  doubt  that  a  license  law  would  raise 
a  group  of  questions,  and  that  it  would  impede  very  much  the  efficiency  of 
this  law  for  the  next  five  or  six  years — perhaps  more,  perhaps  always.  There 
are  a  large  number  of  cases  that  would  be  raised  and  carried  up  to  the  tribunal 
at  Washington,  and  perhaps  come  back  again  before  they  got  it  fixed.  Stable 
legislation,  perhaps  all  of  us  know  how  it  is,  compared  with  one  that  is 
changing  in  practice  and  in  words,  so  as  to  raise  new  questions  of  law  that 
have  been  once  settled,  or  rather  the  law  once  unsettled  becomes  not  so  easy 
to  manage  and  enforce  as  before.  We  should  have  to  decide  again  on  the 
questions  that  we  have  had  under  the  prohibitory  law,  it  would  be  likely. 

Q.     That  would  be  the  presumption,  would  it  not  ? 

A.  It  would  be  the  course  of  law,  unless  we  could  have  it  in  the  very 
form  of  laws  formerly  used  ;  and  then  in  connection  with  the  prohibitory  law 
you  would  have  a  great  number  of  cases  to  settle. 

Q.     So  that  the  practical  efficiency  of  the  law  would  be  diminished  ? 

A.     How  much,  you  can  judge  as  well  as  I. 

Q.  It  has  taken  us  a  dozen  years  to  settle  this  question.  In  that  respect 
you  think  this  an  advantage  over  any  other  new  system  ? 

A.     That  is  my  idea,  sir. 

Q,  What  do  you  think  of  the  justice  of  a  system  which  allows  every 
m  micipality  in  the  Commonwealth  to  have  a  law  of  its  own  and  in  conflict 
with  the  laws  of  other  municipalities,  on  this  subject,  and  changing  every 
year  ? 

A.  I  believe  that  that  legislation  which  makes  it  equal  for  every  citizen  is 
oest.  I  have  said  I  thought  it  would  be  constantly  changing,  if  the  different 
municipalities  were  to  license,  instead  of  the  various  counties.  The  commis- 
sioners vary  in  their  opinions,  but  I  am  sure  that  it  would  be  a  very  objection- 
able feature.  Those  who  desired  licenses  would  address  themselves  to  the 
electors,  and  perhaps  they  would  get  proffers  from  the  various  candidates  for 
he  office,  thus  keeping  up  constantly  an  excitement  in  the  towns ;  and  that 
town  that  had  the  majority  in  favor  of  licensing,  would  have  a  large  custom. 
You  can  see  perfectly,  how  it  would  operate. 

Q.     Then  it  would  be  very  unjust  towards  the  towns  that  did  not  license  ? 

A.     I  think  so,  sir. 

Q.  I  would  be  obliged  to  you  if  you  would  just  read  the  synopsis  of  the 
law  which  is  proposed,  and  I  would  then  like  to  ask  you  a  question. 

[  Continued  on  page  858»] 


APPENDIX.  853 

TESTIMONY  OF  DAVID  PERHAM. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)     You  are  a  resident  of  Chelrasford,  I  believe  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir.     I  reside  in  Chelmsford  proper. 

Q.    What  population  is  there  there,  sir  ? 

A.    In  the  whole  town  ? 

Q,     Are  there  two  towns  ? 

A.    No,  sir.     North  Chelmsford  is  a  village  in  the  town. 

Q.     Your  village  is  called  Chelmsford  proper  ? 

A.     Chelmsford  proper,  it  is  called. 

Q.     What  population  is  there  there  ? 

A.  I  suppose,  perhaps,  North  Chelmsford  would  compose  nearly  quarter 
part  of  the  town,  and  the  rest  might  be  considered,  in  a  certain  sense,  as 
Chelmsford  proper. 

Q.     About  what  is  the  population  ? 

A.     About  two  thousand  in  all,  including  Chelmsford  proper. 

Q.     What  is  the  population  of  North  Chelmsford  ? 

A.     About  quarter. 

Q.     What  is  the  state  of  temperance  there,  sir  ? 

A.  In  speaking  of  this  I  should  make  a  distinction  between  what  I  have 
called  Chelmsford  proper  and  North  Chelmsford.  In  Chelmsford  proper,  the 
sale  of  liquor  has  been  abated  almost  entirely  for  the  last  ten  years,  and  there 
lias  been  a  very  great  contrast  and  diminution  in  the  evils  of  intemperance 
compared  with  the  effect  under  the  old  license  system.  I  think  it  is  perfectly  safe 
to  say  that  there  has  been  a  diminution,  or  at  any  rate,  that  there  was  ten 
times  as  much  sold  under  the  old  license  law  as  at  present,  or  for  the  last  five 
years. 

Q.     Ten  times  as  much  sold  ? 

A.  Ten  times  as  much  sold,  and  ten  times  as  much  less  of  the  visible 
effects  of  intemperance. 

Q.  Is  there  no  place  in  North  Chelmsford  where  liquor  could  be  bought 
secretly  ? 

A .  It  is  not  impossible  but  that  at  Middlesex  village  there  may  be  a  place,  as 
we  might  say  a  "dark-lantern  hotel,"  for  the  accommodation  of  Lowell  people. 
It  does  not  affect  the  people  of  Chelmsford  very  much  more  than  if  it  was  not 
there.  I  have  been  connected  with  the  temperance  cause  since  18-16,  and 
have  knoAvn  all  the  operations  of  it  in  Chelmsford  and  Lowell.  My  business  being 
considerably  in  Lowell,  I  been  familiar  with  it  there  almost  as  well  as  in  my 
own  town.  The  statement  of  the  sale  being  ten  times  as  much  is  not  to  the 
point.  Many  of  my  neighbors  consider  it  considerably  more.  Liquor  has 
been  sold  in  North  Chelmsford  most  of  the  time.  There  has  been  a  hotel 
open  most  of  the  time,  and  there  have  been  for  a  considerable  part  of  the 
time  places  where  it  was  kept  by  foreigners. 

Q.     Open,  or  how  ? 

A.  There  have  been  times  when  it  was  open,  and  times  when  it  was  sold 
under  fear,  and  therefore  the  contrast  has  not  been  so  great. 

Q.     And  the  sale  not  so  much  diminished  in  North  Chelmsford  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     Does  Rev.  Mr.  Clark  live  in  Chelmsford  ? 


854  APPENDIX. 

A.     He  lives  at  North  Chelmsford. 

Q.  He  does  not  seem  to  have  great  success,  then,  in  suppressing  intemper- 
ance in  North  Chelmsford  as  compared  with  Chelmsford  ? 

A.  No,  sir;  and  therefore  it  would  not  be  judged  that  a  person  living  at 
North  Chelmsford  would  be  so  competent  to  judge  as  if  he  had  been  living 
where  it  had  been  abolished  to  so  great  an  extent.  There  was  one  place  at 
South  Chelmsford,  three  or  four  years  ago,  where  a  stranger  came  in  and  took 
an  establishment  there,  and  sold  privately  in  the  first  place  ;  but  it  was  soon 
found  that  young  people  were  getting  intoxicated,  and  people  hunted  around 
and  found  out  this  place,  and  requested  him  to  stop ;  but  he  said  he  had  got  a 
government  license,  and  he  was  going  to  sell,  and  that  they  need  not  trouble 
themselves  about  it.  He  finally  put  out  a  sign,  and  his  neighbors  went  to  him 
and  told  him  they  thought  he  was  mistaken,  but  he  persisted  in  his  course. 
Afterwards  it  was  ascertained  that  he  was  not  protected  by  a  government 
license,  and  they  went  to  him  and  said  that  they  had  got  some  testimony 
against  him,  and  advised  him  to  stop.  He  investigated  the  matter  and  found 
out  that  he  was  at  fault,  and  sold  out  and  left  town.  This  was  a  case  against 
the  opinion  of  the  people  generally,  you  will  understand.  The  question  has 
been  argued  by  my  friend  Clark  and  others,  as  to  temperance  measures.  I 
used  to  labor  with  him  heart  and  hand,  with  our  Honorable  Mr.  Child  and 
others  in  the  tcmpcrence  cause  a  number  of  years  ago,  until  in  my  opinion, 
and  the  opinion  of  the  temperance  community  generally  (that  I  know  by 
facts),  they  have  run  off  from  the  track  in  advocating  a  license  law  as  a  tem- 
perance measure.  The  temperance  people  of  Chelmsford  are  almost  unani- 
mously against  a  license  law,  and  will  send  remonstrances  against  it.  The 
people  there  do  not  suppose  a  license  law  to  be  an  advantage  as  a  temperance 
measure. 

Q.  "\yiiat  do  you  think  the  vote  of  the  people  of  Chelmsford  on  the  ques- 
tion of  license  or  no  license  ? 

A.  I  can  state  a  fact  that  perhaps  might  be  considered  a  test.  Last  fall 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Clark  wras  nominated  after  the  Republican  candidate  was  nom- 
inated, as  an  independent  license  candidate  for  State  Senator.  His  district 
included  Chelmsford,  Dracut  and  Lowell.  In  Chelmsford  he  had  less  than 
one-quarter  of  all  the  votes. 

Q.     In  the  whole  town  ? 

A.  In  the  wrhole  town,  including  his  own  village.  In  Dracut  there  was 
one-third,  I  think,  or  something  like  that,  for  a  license  law.  In  Lowell,  as  I 
understand  (Lowell  men  can  testify  as  to  his  success  there),  his  vote  was  a  . 
scattering  vote,  composed  of  the  Democratic  party,  and  those  of  other  parties 
that  considered  the  liquor  question  of  more  importance  than  politics,  and 
there  was  great  run,  or  a  great  rush.  I  have  heard  it  said  that  those  laboring 
for  a  license  law  spent  a  great  deal  of  money  in  endeavoring  to  cany  the 
election.  At  any  rate  it  has  been  reported  to  me  that  there  was  very  great 
effort  indeed  from  all  the  rum  class,  as  you  might  say,  to  carry  the  election. 
Therefore  we  can  conceive  how  much  it  might  be  considered  a  temperance 
measure,  and  who  the  friends  of  the  license  law  are,  as  a  temperance 
measure. 

Q.     All  the  liquor  folks  voted  for  him  ? 


APPENDIX.  855 

A.     You  might  say  that  it  composed  them  all. 

Q.  You  do  not  generally  look  to  that  source  for  practical  temperance 
measures,  I  suppose  ? 

A.  We  consider  these  men  generally  as  those  that  wish  drinking  and  sell- 
ing. In  watching  the  movements  of  the  temperance  cause,  I  have  noticed  the 
fact  that  there  is  a  class  of  men  who  are  advocating  a  license  law  as  a  temperance 
measure,  advocate  it  because  the  prohibitory  law  is  not  enforced.  It  seems  to 
me  that  there  is  a  reason  why  it  was  not  enforced,  during  the  last  year,  and 
especially  during  the  war.  We  all  understand  that  during  the  war  people 
were  willing  to  suffer  almost  anything  rather  than  to  distract  the  Republican 
party,  which  would  be  considered  the  life  of  the  nation.  Therefore  they 
suffered  it  to  continue.  But  now,  as  the  war  is  over,  I  have  reason  to  believe 
that  the  law  can  be  enforced. 

Q.  Is  there  not  an  improvement  in  the  temperance  feeling,  both  morally 
and  legally  ? 

A.  I  should  think  so  ;  and  in  connection  with  what  I  know  in  Lowell,  I 
have  been  informed  that  many  prominent  places  have  stopped  buying  with 
the  expectation  of  the  law  being  enforced,  and  there  is  apparently  a  very 
great  change  indeed  for  the  last  month.  I  think  I  know  of  many  grocery 
stores  that  from  public  declarations  are  to  go  out  of  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Chelmsford  is  a  town  where  they  make  a  good 
deal  of  cider,  is  it  not  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  some. 

Q.    The  cider  is  very  fine  ? 

A.    It  is  very  good,  I  suppose. 

Q.    Do  they  sell  it  ? 

A.    Perhaps  some  do,  and  perhaps  some  do  not. 

Q.  Do  you  not  know  that  there  is  a  large  manufactory  there  where  they 
manufature  and  sell  it  to  go  all  over  the  country  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  there  is. 

Q.     It  is  largely  sold  there  ? 

A.    It  is  sold  there  at  wholesale. 

Q.  Are  there  not  very  large  quantities  sold  in  Chelmsford  to  go  all  over 
the  country  ? 

A.    I  think  it  is  not  very  large.    It  is  quite  limited  indeed. 

Q.  What  is  the  usage  among  your  people  ?  Are  they  teetotallers  in  the 
sense  that  they  do  not  drink  cider  of  any  kind  ? 

A.  I  think  there  are  very  few  who  call  themselves  total  abstinence  men, 
who  do  not  drink  cider.  I  can  say  that  there  is  not  a  great  deal  of  cider 
made  there,  and  that  a  great  deal  of  what  is  made,  is  made  into  vinegar.  That 
is  my  business  in  connection  with  farming,  and  I  have  made  as  much  as 
seventeen  or  eighteen  barrels  merely  for  vinegar  during  the  year.  I  do  not 
use  it  myself,  or  any  of  my  family. 

Q.    You  spoke  of  Mr.  Clark.    You  do  not  think  he  has  been  successful  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  he  is  (what  would  be  called)  advancing  the  temperance 
cause,  by  any  means. 

Q.  Advancing  the  temperance  cause  is  really  the  end  to  be  aimed  at,  is  it 
not? 


856  APPENDIX. 

A.  It  is  moral  influence  connected  with  law.  I  think  that  both  should  go 
together. 

Q.  The  object  is  to  get  the  people  of  Boston  from  the  use  of  intoxicating 
drinks,  is  it  not  ? 

A.    I  think  it  is,  sir. 

Q.  May  not  a  man  be  very  sincere  in  believing  that  a  license  lav/-  is  the 
be&t  means  of  effecting  this  object  ? 

A-     He  has  a  right  to  his  opinion,  I  suppose. 

Q.     I  ask  if  he  may  not  be  sincere  2 

A.  He  may  be  ;  I  cannot  say.  But  allow  me  to  make  one  further  state- 
ment as  to  nearly  all  the  people  of  Chelmsford ;  at  any  rate,  all  of  the  temper- 
ance community.  I  can  say  that  they  would  feel  it  to  be  a  very  serious  thing 
if  a  license  law  should  be  passed,  and  they  should  be  forced  to  have  any  one 
licensed  in  the  vicinity. 

Q.     Are  a  large  majority  of  the  people  against  a  license  ? 

A.     I  think  this  was  the  case  last  fall. 

Q.     Then  there  is  no  danger  of  there  being  any  license  law  in  your  town  ? 

A.    I  should  think  not,  if  they  take  control  of  it. 

Q.  Are  you  aware  that  when  you  adopt  a  license  law  in  any  town,  the 
people  of  that  town  must  necessarily  be  in  favor  of  it. 

A.  I  was  not  aware  of  the  exact  feature  of  the  proposed  system,  whether 
it  would  be  confined  to  the  town  or  the  county. 

Q.  Then  in  speaking  of  Chelmsford,  you  supposed  that  the  license  of  the 
sale  was  to  be  set  up  against  the  wishes  .of  the  people  of  Chelmsford  ? 

A.     I  should  think  it  would  be  if  others  had  the  control  of  it. 

Q.    None  of  the  petitioners  having  proposed  that,  obviates  the  objection  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  it  would  very  much,  because  my  neighboring  town 
might  have  it. 

Q.  Have  you  not  had  that  in  your  neighboring  city  of  Lowell,  so  far,  here- 
tofore ? 

A .  I  suppose  it  has  been  so  that  they  could  get  it  almost  any  time  in  Low- 
ell ;  still  there  has  been  a  very  great  diminution  in  the  amount  consumed, 
compared  with  former  times. 

Q.  Have  the  people  of  Chelmsford,  if  they  wish,  any  difficulty  in  getting 
it  at  Lowell  ? 

A.  I  suppose  they  can  get  it  there  ;  or  I  suppose  they  have  in  times  past. 
I  do  not  suppose  they  could  get  it  as  well  to-day. 

Q.  You  do  not  suppose  that  the  prohibitory  law  has  prevented  the  use  of 
it  in  Chelmsford,  nor  that  the  people  that  wanted  it  could  get  it  without  any 
difficulty  ? 

A.    I  can  conceive  that  it  is,  indeed. 

Q.  If  there  has  been  no  difficulty  in  getting  it,  how  did  the  law  produce 
that  diminution  ? 

A.    I  can  conceive  that  moral  suasion  will  operate  somewhat. 

Q,  Then  because  it  is  not  sold  in  the  vicinity,  and  on  account  of  the  incon- 
venience of  it,  people  go  without  it,  do  they  ? 

A.  On  account  of  the  inconvenience.  Of  course,  if  they  sold  it  in  the 
community  it  would  be  used  to  a  greater  extent. 


APPENDIX.  857 

Q.  The  question  which  I  desire  to  ask  is :  supposing  there  may  be  a  differ- 
ence in  that  respect,  would  the  difficulty  be  greater  in  enforcing  the  law  in 
North  Chelmsford  than  in  Boston  ? 

A.    I  suppose  it  would  not  be. 

Q.  Now,  it  would  be  your  opinion  that  it  would  be  best  that  you  have  no 
license  law  in  Chelmsford ;  would  you  think  it  right  for  the  people  to  say  that 
you  should  ? 

A.    I  should  not  feel  it  so. 

Q.  Do  you  feel  that  it  is  right  to  say  that  Boston  shall  not  have  her  way 
because  it  is  contrary  to  your  opinion,  while  they  judge  it  is  better  for  them  ? 

A.  Perhaps  we  should  have  nothing  to  say  about  it,  if  they  confined  it  to 
themselves.  They  having  the  liberty  to  sell  would  sell  to  our  people. 

Q.  But  you  say  there  is  less  drinking  because  of  the  inconvenience  of  get- 
ting it  in  Lowell.  You  have  no  idea  that  anybody  will  come  to  Boston  to  get 
it,  if  they  would  not  come  to  Lowell  ? 

A.  "Well,  sir,  if  it  is  sold  in  Boston,  it  will  be  sold  from  Boston  to  Lowell, 
and  from  Lowell  to  Chelmsford. 

Q.  Now  I  would  like  to  know  if  you  think  it  is  really  right  for  you  to 
assume  in  Chelmsford  to  say  what  we  should  do  in  Boston,  while  everybody 
concedes  that  you  should  take  care  of  your  own  interests  in  your  own  way. 
Do  you  think  that  is  really  a  fair  practice  for  men  to  act  upon  ? 

A,  I  suppose  if  our  neighborhood  generally  should  have  a  license,  they 
would  confine  it  to  their  own  people. 

Q.  In  the  towns  in  which  there  would  be  licenses,  what  would  probably  be 
done  under  this  system.  Has  there  been  a  moment  that  your  people  could 
not  get  as  much  as  they  wanted  ? 

-4.    Yes,  sir ;  I  can  say  that  in  Lowell  people  have  been  refused. 

Q.    You  do  not  mean  to  say  that  liquor  has  not  been  sold  in  Lowell  V 

A.    I  think  it  is  so  at  the  present  day. 

Q.  Do  you  know  anything  of  your  own  knowledge.  It  is  testified  in  gen- 
eral that  liquor  is  sold  all  over  the  town.  You  do  not  know  of  your  own 
knowledge,  do  you  ? 

A.    Perhaps  I  could  not  speak  as  an  eye-witness  to  it. 

Q.    You  do  not  know  that  there  is  no  sale  ? 

A .     I  could  not  say  as  an  eye-witness. 

Q.  Do  you  regard  it  necessary  that  the  cities  and  larger  towns  should  be 
prohibited  from  selling  liquor  ?  You  say  that  in  cities  this  law  should  be 
executed,  and  that  you  are  not  willing  that  they  should  have  much  of  any 
voice  as  to  regulating  their  own  affairs  ? 

A.  I  cannot  say  that.  If  you  sell  in  the  cities,  it  is  sold  throughout  the 
State.  I  think  this  State  ought  to  say  whether  they  shall  sell  it  or  not. 

Q.  In  view  of  that  principle,  what  would  be  your  opinion  as  to  the  State 
Constabulary  undertaking  to  decide  in  Boston  what  class  of  dealers  may  go 
on  and  sell  without  their  intefering,  and  what  class  cannot.  Is  that  proper  ? 

A.    I  should  think  it  was  their  business  to  enforce  the  law  as  it  is  framed  ? 

Q.  What  would  you  say  of  the  law  and  the  principle  involved  in  it,  the 
effect  of  which  is  to  prohibit  a  certain  class  of  dealers  from  selling,  and  not 
affect  others  ? 

108 


858  APPENDIX. 

A.  I  should  say  that  Boston  ought  to  comply  with  the  law  as  well  as  other 
places. 

Q.  Supposing  they  find  it  necessary  to  make  this  discrimination,  and  say 
to  the  wholesale  dealers,  we  shall  not  seize  your  liquors  ;  can  you  not  conceive 
some  difficulty  in  Boston  in  enforcing  this  law  ? 

A.  So  far  as  that  is  concerned,  I  can  conceive  that  there  are  some  diffi- 
culties. 

Q.  But  here  in  Boston,  with  all  the  several  instrumentalities  which  they 
have,  they  have  got  against  a  stump.  Can  you  not  conceive  that  in  Boston 
we  may  have  difficuties  that  you  know  nothing  about  in  North  Chelmsford  ? 

A.     There  may  be  difficulties  which  we  should  not  encounter. 

Q.  Now  are  you  willing  that  we  should  judge  in  Boston  as  to  the  best 
instrumentality  for  us  in  Boston  (not  to  <ipply  to  you),  to  promote  the  cause 
of  temperance,  and  the  kind  of  legislation  bearing  upon  it  ? 

A.     I  should  be  willing  if  they  would  not  disturb  us. 

Q.  Well,  you  know  that  it  has  been  sold  freely  in  Lowell  most  of  the 
time  for  seventeen  years  ? 

A .  There  has  been  a  large  portion  of  that  time  when  it  has  not  been  sold 
freely,  and  when  it  has  been  sold  under  fear. 

Q.    It  has  been  sold,  nevertheless  ? 

A.  I  suppose  there  may  have  been  places,  for  nearly  all  the  time,. where 
certain  persons  who  understood  the  manoeuvres  could  get  it. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)  Brother  Child,  in  speaking  of  the  difficulties  of 
enforcing  the  law  in  Boston,  speaks  of  these  large  dealers,  and  of  the  Con- 
stabulary not  having  thought  it  expedient  to  seize  their  liquors  at  the  present 
time.  Do  you  not  understand  that  these  large  dealers  have  their  liquors  in 
such  packages  that  they  cannot  be  seized  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir;  I  answered  that  question  in  that  way. 

Q.     Do  you  suppose  that  to  be  a  practical  solution  of  the  question  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  that  is  the  reason  that  they  do  not  seize 
packages  in  that  condition,  which  legally  they  cannot  seize  ? 

A.     That  is  the  way  I  understand  it. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  EDWARD  MELLEN  (continued.) 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  I  would  like  to  ask  you  now,  since  you  have  read 
the  statements  which  were  handed  you,  whether  they  do  not  open  the  way  for 
a  great  many  legal  objections  ? 

A.  As  it  now  stands,  it  is  not  drawn  up  so  that  you  can  see  ;  nor  can  any 
one,  by  cursory  reading,  see  how  far  they  might  conflict.  When  a  bill  is 
drawn  up,  it  might  be  seen  how  far  they  might  be  in  conflict  and  how  far  that 
might  be  likely  to  arise.  I  cannot  say  how  many  questions  may  arise. 

Q.  You  see  that  there  is  provision  for  sale  by  grocers  and  apothecaries, 
and  hotel-keepers  and  victuallers.  Is  there  not  room  consistently  with  that 
synopsis  to  get  up  any  number  of  grog-shops,  if  they  only  have  pie  or  cake  to 
sell  ? 

A.  There  have  always  been  evasions  of  that  kind,  and  such  evasions  would 
be  seen  here,  undoubtedly,  in  towns  where  the  public  opinion  is  right,  which 


APPENDIX.  859 

would  be  almost  every  town  in  the  Commonwealth.  I  have  no  hesitation  in 
believing  that  a  law  based  on  such  a  principle  as  this  would  increase  the  sale 
of  liquor  as  a  beverage. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  You  have  spoken  of  the  state  of  things  that  was 
observed  by  you  a  great  many  years  ago,  or,  to  begin  with,  about  1840  ? 

A.     Coming  down  to  1838. 

Q.     Beginning  with  1828  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  As  compared  with  the  present  state  of  things,  do  you  not  recognize  the 
fact  that  there  is  a  very  great  moral  difference  in  the  tone  of  society  and,  a 
very  different  tendency  in  society,  all  over  the  refined  and  civilized  world, 
Massachusetts  included,  concerning  the  practice  of  personal  temperance,  or 
self-imposed  restraint  ? 

A.  There  is,  undoubtedly,  a  different  sentiment  now  on  the  subject  of  the 
use  of  liquors  as  a  beverage.  The  whole  tone  of  public  sentiment  has  been 
changed  since  that  time.  As  for  restraint,  I  have  always  observed  the  human 
mind  is  very  restive  under  it,  and  I  think  the  cause  was4he  same  forty  years 
ago  in  that  respect. 

Q.     I  said  self-imposed  restraint  ? 

A.  I  ask  your  pardon.  I  did  not  so  understand  you.  Undoubtedly  there 
is.  , 

Q.  You  know,  I  suppose,  or  if  you  do  not  recollect  it,  you  know  from 
tradition  and  from  reading,  that  from  fifty  to  a  hundred  years  ago  it  was  not 
disreputable  for  the  most  respectable  men  to  be  intoxicated  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  was  so,  sir.  I  have  heard  it  said  so ;  but  still  there  was 
a  loss  of  confidence,  of  course,  in  any  man  who  was  in  the  habit  of  it ;  but 
there  was  great  leniency. 

Q.  But  al-1  the  way  back,  from  forty  or  fifty  years  ago  to  a  hundred  years 
ago,  in  our  Puritan  community,  do  you  not  find  it  to  be  true,  as  shown  his- 
torically, that  the  whole  body  of  the  people  were  suffering  from  over  stimula- 
tion rather  than  from  under  stimulation — that  is  as  a  tendency  ? 

A.  I  think  it  is  so.  You  will  observe  it  in  a  thousand  ways.  You  will 
find  old  documents  that  will  show  that  there  was  a  greater  use  then  than 
now. 

Q.  So  that  what  the  people  themselves  are  likely  to  do  when  living  free 
and  acting  under  the  influence  of  reason,  morality  and  judgment,  is  not  pre- 
cisely the  same  as  people  would  have  done  in  any  part  of  that  period  ? 

A.  Perhaps  it  is  not  to  the  same  extent;  but  one  having  observed  the 
course  of  action  under  the  laws  for  some  thirty  or  forty  years,  can  see  sub- 
stantially what  the  same  population  would  do  under  a  statute  somewhat  in 
the  same  form. 

Q.  You  mean,  I  suppose,  that  you  can  reason  to  some  extent  from  the  one 
to  the  other  ? 

A.  That  is  precisely  my  proposition.  That  I  can  tell  substantially  what 
the  same  population  would  do  under  the  circumstances  imposed  by  a  similar 
law. 

Q.  Now,  do  you  not  think  that  we  ought  to  remember  that  we  are  dealing 
with  a  subject  which  includes,  within  itself,  all  the  delicacies  and  subtleties  of 


860  APPENDIX. 

« 

the  human  mind,  heart  and  character ;  and  that  when  legislating  for  the  pur- 
pose of  reducing  the  self-abuse  of  man,  by  wanton  and  careless  misuse  of 
things  which  have  a  certain  degree  of  usefulness,  we  are  under  the  necessity 
of  carefully  watching  ourselves  to  see  that  we  do  not  overwork  the  mechanism 
and  neglect  the  moral  dynamics  ? 

A .     Undoubtedly,  that  is  true ;  and  all  that  I  take  into  my  calculations. 

Q.  Well,  now,  going  back  to  the  time  of  the  temperance  reform,  beginning 
at  the  time  when,  as  I  have  learned,  one  in  twenty  or  twenty-five  of  the  voters 
in  the  old  county  of  Plymouth  were  posted  drunkards — going  back  to  that 
time  and  coining  up  to  now,  and  working  out,  under  a  moral  influence  and  by 
the  blessing  of  Almighty  God,  a  great  moral  deliverance,  do  you  not  advise  a 
certain  degree  of  decorous  caution  in  endeavoring  to  foist  in  a  merely  human 
machine,  and  works  of  art  and  man's  device  ?  Do  you  not  recognize  the 
necessity  of  doing  so  ? 

A.     Undoubtedly,  sir ;  it  is  self-obvious. 

Q.  Now,  so  far  as  the  institutions  of  the  law  devised  by  the  Legislature 
and  executed  by  constables  are  concerned,  in  doing  this  work  is  it  not 
necessary  and  absolute,  in  order  to  its  having  any  great  efficiency  for  good, 
and  avoiding  great  efficiency  for  evil,  that  it  should  be  so  framed  as  to  work 
side  by  side  with  the  development  of  the  feeling  of  the  people  and  to  unite 
the  judgment  of  all  or  nearly  all  good  men  ? 

A.  I  should  not  wait  for  that  of  all  good  men,  or  nearly  all  men.  Between 
all  these  opinions  that  is  very  difficult  we  all  know,  to  manage.  I  have  no 
theory  to  propose  on  this  subject.  I  have  none  that  I  desire  to  propose 
except  that  which  may  conduce  to  the  public  good.  And  I  was  going  to  say 
that  in  all  these  it  is  exceedingly  difficult  on  the  one  side  or  the  other,  to  say 
how  far  you  will  restrain  or  let  loose.  There  are  many  things  that,  as  we  all 
know,  cannot  be  entirely  restrained.  This  cannot  be  entirely  restrained  ;  but 
I  cannot  say  how  far  it  can  operate  and  control  in  this  city,  for  instance.  I 
cannot  say  how  men  are  stirred  up  in  this  place  or  whether  they  feel  any 
great  interest  in  regard  to  the  matter.  My  proposition,  and  yours,  I  presume, 
(it  is  immaterial  what  our  private  impressions  are),  is  that  it  will  produce  a 
salutary  check.  We  are  all  aware  how  under  the  license  law  many  will 
protect  themselves,  and  it  is  only  in  the  prosecution  that  you  can  restrain 
these  men.  I  go  as  far  as  any  one  else  in  the  employment  of  moral  suasion, 
of  which  we  have  heard  so  often,  but  there  are,  after  all  this  is  exercised, 
some  men  who  will  not  be  reached  by  it. 

Q.  You  admit  that  there  are  uses  for  alcoholic  liquids,  not  only  in  the 
manufactures  and  in  the  arts,  but  also  in  connection  with  the  human  economy, 
both  external  and  internal  ? 

A.     Undoubtedly  it  is  so. 

Q.  Now,  when  you  come  to  the  use,  by  the  private  individual,  in  his  own 
house  and  in  his  own  person,  of  an  article  lawfully  existent,  and  which  he 
may  righteously  use,  you  would  not  have  the  law  interfere  and  undertake  to 
decide  for  him  ? 

A.  Certainly  I  should  not.  The  best  regulation  with  safety  to  the  com- 
munity would  be  my  doctrine. 


APPENDIX.  861 

Q.  Now,  admitting  that  there  is  a  certain  quantity  which  must  be  sold 
and  must  be  used,  anjl  when  we  come  down  to  the  last  analysis,  the  ultimate 
use  must  of  necessity  be  decided  by  the  people  themselves,  and  cannot  pos- 
sibly, under  Divine  Providence,  be  decided  by  any  government,  do  you  not 
think  it  advisable  that,  while  attempting  to  protect  the  public  and  preserve 
peace  and  order,  we  should  seek  to  create  as  little  antagonism  between 
the  people  on  the  one  hand  and  the  government  on  the  other,  as  possible  ? 

A.  Certainly,  if  it  can  be  done  so  as  to  protect  the  people.  The  natural 
liberty  of  the  people  demands  that  there  should  be  only  so  much  restraint  as 
is  necessary  for  the  public  good,  and  not  be  a  cause  of  friction  and  antagonism 
between  the  government  and  the  people.  Now  when  it  comes  to  a  question 
of  retail  distribution  of  these  seductive  and  dangerous,  but  yet,  for  some  pur- 
poses, useful  and  necessary  articles,  in  a  given  community,  would  it  not  be 
better,  all  other  things  being  equal,  that  that  community  or  locality,  for 
instance,  Needham,  Wayland,  or  Worcester,  or  Boston,  should  have  something 
to  say  about  the  persons  who  should  dispense  it,  and  the  circumstances  under 
which  it  should  be  dispensed  ? 

A.     Undoubtedly ;  and  they  do  with  the  present  law. 

Q.  We  will  speak  of  that  in  a  moment.  But  if  there  is  to  be  a  certain 
ultimate  minimum  of  consumption  reached,  and  permanently  maintained, 
would  it  not  be  most  surely  reached  and  permanently  maintained,  by  having 
the  people  of  the  locality  themselves  feel  that  upon  their  interest  and  constant 
vigilance  and  discussion  with  each  other,  that  result  in  a  great  measure  is  to 
be  obtained  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  it  is  so.  I  do  not  think  that  in  the  small  munici- 
palities or  the  cities,  it  should  be  left  finally  to  the  people,  because  they  have 
an  effect  upon  adjoining  municipalities  and  cities,  and  throughout  the  whole 
State. 

Q.  Do  not  the  town  of  Needham  and  the  town  of  Wayland  appoint  their 
own  liquor  agents  ? 

A.    I  am  a  little  doubtful  about  Wayland ;  I  do  not  know  about  Needham. 

Q.  If  they  are  appointed  at  all,  they  are  appointed  by  the  towns,  are  they 
not? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  You  are  not  in  favor  of  that  right  being  taken  away  from  the  towns 
and  having  liquor  agents  appointed  by  the  Governor  and  Council  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  think  not. 

Q.  Therefore,  for  the  purposes  of  distributing  these  things,  the  towns 
themselves  should  appoint  for  themselves  ? 

A.    For  specific  objects. 

Q.  I  understand  that ;  but  you  also  know  that  the  liquor  agent,  if  he  sold 
the  article,  has  no  power  to  control  the  use  ? 

A.     Of  course  not. 

Q.  So  that  the  town  agent  in  Needham  or  in  Wayland,  if  he  sells  to  John 
Smith  or  Peter  Gill,  would  not  be  able  to  prevent  him  from  making  improper 
use  of  it,  and  cannot  be  punished  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 


862  APPENDIX. 

Q.  That  being  so,  do  you  consider  tli.it,  on  the  whole,  it  is  desirable  that 
the  government  should  come  into  the  liquor  traffic,  or  to  the  carrying  on  of 
any  other  business  ?  Is  it  not  better  that  the  government,  as  a  government, 
should  be  kept  out  of  the  traffic  ? 

A.  If  it  can  be  done  with  equal  safety  by  other  means,  I  would  have  the 
government  kept  out  of  it. 

Q.     That  is,  if  it  can  be  done  by  other  means  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Therefore  is  not  the  burden  of  proof  on  the  government  ? 

A.     I  should  think  so. 

Q.  Do  you  not  think  that  if  our  State  should  be  enabled  to  swing  around 
the  whole  traffic  in  pure  alcohol  and  alcoholic  compositions  and  beverages  of 
every  description  from  the  wholesalers  and  manufacturers  and  retailers  into 
the  hands  of  government  officials  themselves,  that  there  would  be  great  peril 
that  this  business,  amounting  to  many  millions  of  dollars  annually,  would 
control  the  politics  of  the  State  instead  of  being  controlled  by  the  State  ? 

A .     I  should  fear  so. 

Q.  I  should  fear  so,  too ;  and,  therefore,  is  not  that  consideration  one  that 
we  ought  to  consider  in  respect  to  this  very  kind  of  legislation  which  we  have 
now  in  hand  ? 

A.  In  all  these,  we  are  to  set  one  against  the  other  and  take  an  eligible 
course. 

Q.  Now  let  us  go  back  to  the  subject  of  licenses.  You  havB  been  asked 
to  compare  a  possible  license  law  with  those  which  have  existed,  and  to  com- 
pare the  probable  operation  of  such  license  law.  I  suppose  you  recollect  that 
the  institution  of  the  State  Constabulary  did  not  exist  cotemporaneously  with 
any  of  those  license  systems  ? 

A,     Certainly,  sir. 

Q.     Or  the  power  to  seize  exist  heretofore  ? 

A.    Before  1852? 

Q.    It  did  not  exist  under  the  old  laws,  did  it  ? 

A.  Of  course  not,  under  the  old  laws — not  before  1852.  I  think  there  was 
none  of  that  machinery  in  connection  with  the  law  before  1852. 

Q.  Here  are  two  new  and  powerful  agencies.  Now  in  proposing,  as  our 
scheme  does,  that  the  power  to  seize  shall  continue  as  to  all  liquors  unlaw- 
fully held  for  sale ;  that  the  Constabulary  of  the  Commonwealth,  as  a  means 
of  public  order,  shall  continue  likewise ;  and  when  you  consider  that  all  per- 
sons who  may  be  complained  of  for  selling  without  legal  right  will  be  subject 
to  be  indicted  and  proceeded  against  by  the  existing  law  just  as  it  is  now- 
written  and  just  as  it  is  now  interpreted  by  the  courts,  does  not  the  difficulty 
relative  to  the  interpretation  and  settlement  of  the  meaning  of  the  statutes 
for  all  practical  purposes  disappear  ? 

A.  Not  to  my  mind.  A  law  cannot  very  well  be  framed  in  regard  to 
which  some  ingenious  man  may  not  frame  an  objection. 

Q.  Now  let  us  sec.  The  town  agent  is  authorized  to  sell.  Suppose  you 
say  in  your  law  another  man  may  also  be  permitted  or  licensed  or  authorized 
by  the  town  authorities  to  sell  the  same  liquors.  Will  there  be  any  more  dif- 


APPENDIX.  863 

ficulty  in  indicting  the  second  man  or  punishing  him,  than  there  is  m  indicting 
the  first  man  ? 

A.  Perhaps  not;  but  when  you  see  the  whole  community  agitated,  and 
the  question  carried  to  Washington  whether  a  man  can  sell  under  a  govern- 
ment license,  one  can  hardly  tell  what  objections  may  not  be  raised. 

Q.  That  is  to  say,  there  is  no  telling  what  professional  ingenuity  or  stu- 
pidity there  may  be. 

A.     Be  it  so ;  that  is  not  my  expression. 

Q.  I  am  saying  that  a  second  person  is  licensed  to  sell  or  forbidden  to  sell ; 
that  is  in  connection  with  existing  barriers.  Is  there  any  difficulty  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  as  there  is.  I  have  only  said  that  it  might  be.  When 
you  get  a  law  passed,  or  a  legislative  provision,  giving  liberty  to  voters,  the 
whole  thing  rises  up  in  a  series  of  questions  before  the  courts,  and  you  will 
hardly  get  them  down  for  a  series  of  years.  That  is  all  that  I  mean. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HON.  HARTLEY  WILLIAMS. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  are  prosecuting  officer  for  Worcester 
County,  I  believe  ? 

A.    I  am,  sir. 

Q.     How  long,  sir  ? 

A.  I  was  elected  in  1865,  and  so  have  been  a  little  more  than  a  year  in 
the  officei 

Q.  Did  you  find  any  serious  obstacle  in  the  enforcement  of  the  present  law 
in  regard  to  the  traffic  in  liquors  in  your  county  ? 

A.  No,  sir ;  no  very  serious  difficulties.  'There  is  no  very  serious  diffi- 
culty so  far  as  the  jury  is  concerned.  The  difficulty  is  in  finding  testimony. 

Q.  Do  you  not  find  that  it  is,  to  a  great  extent,  an  aid  in  suppressing  the 
traffic  ? 

A .     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  it  not  very  largely  restrained  in  Worcester  County,  by  that 
agency  ? 

A.     I  have  no  doubt  that  it  is. 

Q.     Do  you  think  there  is  a  very  large  amount  of  open  sale  in  Worcester  ? 

A.  That  is  very  difficult  for  me  to  answer.  The  officers  could  answer  that 
very  much  better  than  I  can.  I  have  no  doubt  of  this :  that  there  are  large 
numbers  who,  a  year  ago,  were  engaged  in  breaking  the  law,  who  have  given 
up  now,  because  of  the  prosecutions. 

Q.  They  feel  that  they  are  to  be  vigorously  pursued,  and  that  probably 
the  State  will  be  too  strong  for  them  ? 

A.     That  is  probably  the  opinion. 

Q.  Have  you  anything  further  that  you  desire  to  say,  relative  to  the  gen- 
eral subject  ? 

A.  I  came  here  simply  to  answer  questions.  I  have  no  speech  prepared. 
I  can  say  this  :  that  I  can  hardly  conceive  of  an  instrument  of  more  efficiency, 
— for  that  is  the  great  object,  and  I  suppose  it  is  of  all  good  men, — to  sup- 
press intemperance ;  and  I  cannot  conceive  of  a  law  that  could  be  more 
efficient  than  the  present  law.  It  may  be  imperfect,  perhaps,  but  the  experience 
of  the  last  year,  renders  it  a  little  dangerous  to  sell.  I  have  heard  that  it  would 


864  APPENDIX. 

be  more  so  under  the  present  law  than  under  a  license  law.  Of  course,  I 
have  not  had  any  particular  experience  in  that  and  I  cannot  say  whether  it 
would  be  just  as  difficult  to  get  the  testimony  in  cases  under  that  law  as  in 
cases  of  the  violation  of  the  present  law.  There  is  another  suggestion, — 
perhaps  not  a  reason, — why  the  law  should  be  retained.  So  far  as  I  have 
been  able  to  learn  from  inquiry,  those  who  sell  and  those  who  defend  the 
sellers  unite  in  the  opinion  that  the  license  law  is  better  than  the  present 
one. 

Q.    The  sellers  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir ;  and  those  who  defend  the  sellers. 

Q.  Practical  temperance  measures  have  not  generally  come  from  such 
sources,  have  they  ? 

A.  No,  so  far  as  I  have  observed.  There  is  one  other  thing  that  has 
suggested  itself  to  my  mind,  which  is,  that,  ordinarily,  in  granting  licenses, 
every  person  in  the  community  who  can  pay  for  a  license  expects  that  the 
government  will  license  him.  I  understand  that  in  cases  of  this  sort  it  is  not 
proposed  to  grant  licenses,  except  to  a  certain  extent.  One  other  suggestion 
occurs  to  me.  One  objection  to  it  has  been  that  probably  it  had  not  been 
enforced  and  could  not  be ;  yet  probably  there  has  never  been  a  time  when  it 
was  more  likely  to  be  enforced  than  at  the  present  time.  I  suppose  it  is  well 
known  that  the  Constabulary  force,  as  it  is  called  (I  do  not  know  how  much 
has  been  said  in  regard  to  that),  is  a  very  efficient  instrument  for  the  execu- 
tion of  this  law. 

Q.  You  have  no  question  that  this  vigorous  enforcement  of  the  law  has 
caused  this  vigorous  effort  to  get  the  law  changed  ? 

A.  Well,  sir  ;  that  has  suggested  itself  to  my  mind  very  naturally.  I  have 
not  supposed  that  the  temperance  people  were  moving  in  this  direction.  I 
have  not  supposed  that  this  movement  for  a  change  was  from  such  people, 
though  I  have  no  doubt  that  there  are  temperance  men  in  the  community 
who  are  honest  in  their  conviction  that  the  license  law  would  be  the  best ; 
but  I  think  they  would  find  that  those  who  sell  would  be  on  their  side. 

Q.     Do  you  not  find  that  the  present  law  is  not  enforced  in  Boston  ? 

A.    I  think  that  may  be  so. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  You  spoke  of  the  enforcement  of  this  law.  If 
nine  thousand  citizens  of  Boston  petition  for  it,  does  it  indicate  a  state  of 
sentiment  in  favor  of  carrying  out  the  prohibitory  law  ? 

A .  That  is  a  matter  that  you  and  the  Committee  could  judge  of  as  well 
as  I  could.  I  suppose  that  if  a  majority  of  the  members  of  a  community  are 
opposed  to  a  law,  there  might  be  and  would  be  great  difficulty  in  enforcing  it. 

Q.  Will  a  law  of  this  peculiar  character,  which  strikes  at  the  private 
practice  of  individuals,  and  their  acts  in  their  families,  with  so  great  a  senti- 
ment against  it,  be  fully  carried  out,  even  with  the  most  perfect  machinery  ? 
What  is  your  experience  in  this  matter  as  prosecuting  officer  ? 

A.  I  will  say  in  answer  to  that,  that  the  only  difficulty  I  see  in  the  way 
would  be  in  getting  a  proper  jury  to  try  the  cases.  If  you  have  men  on  your 
panel  who  believe  that  a  law  is  wrong  and  that  no  man  ought  to  be  convicted, 
it  would  be  very  difficult  to  get  convictions  under  such  circumstances. 


APPENDIX.  865 

Q.  In  regard  to  this  law  as  exciting  a  great  deal  of  interest  as  it  does  in 
Boston,  and  a  very  large  majority  of  the  legal  voters  being  opposed  to  it ;  can 
you  not,  in  that  state  of  things,  conceive  that  the  people  of  Boston  may  think 
that  they  could  promote  temperance  by  some  modification  of  this  law  V 

A .     I  have  no  doubt  that  they  might  be  so. 

Q.  Now  if  a  law  of  this  kind  were  to  be  passed,  permitting  licenses  to  be 
given  to  public  houses  and  to  victualing  saloons  to  furnis.h  intoxicating  liquors, 
and  that  only  with  food,  and  no  public  bar  being  allowed,  and  grocers  being 
only  permitted  to  furnish  liquors  to  families  to  buy  them  and  carry  them  away, 
and  never  to  have  them  drink  on  the  premises,  and  those  licenses  being  held 
at  the  pleasure  of  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen,  and  the  present  machinery  left 
in  full  force  in  reference  to  the  unauthorized  sale  and  of  violation  of  the  law, 
—do  you  think  that,  under  that  system,  as  the  present  law  is  in  Boston,  we 
could  promote  temperance  better  than  under  the  present  law  ? 

A.  1  have  not  analyzed  that  precise  question,  but  my  impression  would  be 
that  you  could  not,  and  for  this  reason  :  that  at  present,  I  think  that  liquor- 
selling  is  generally  regarded  as  a  disreputable  business.  If  you  grant  licenses 
it  gives  a  respectability  and  character  to  the  sale,  which  it  did  not  have  before. 
I  think  that  the  tendency  would  be  rather  to  increase  than  to  diminish  intem- 
perance. 

Q.  Is  it  disreputable  for  a  man  to  sell  a  glass  of  liquor  to  me,  if  it  is  not 
for  me  to  drink  ? 

A.    If  the  sale  be  in  violation  of  the  law  it  is  disreputable. 

TESTIMONY  OF  REV.  EDWARD  OTHEMAN. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  I  have  called  you  to  testify  on  one  particular 
matter.  There  has  been  a  good  deal  said  about  the  sentiment  of  the  clergy 
of  this  State.  I  understand  you  have  taken  some  measures  to  ascertain  that 
sentiment  as  far  as  practicable.  Will  you  please  tell  us  what  they  are  ? 

A.  As  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  hear  from  clergymen  in  Massachusetts, 
in  writing,  I  learn  that  there  are  some  nine  hundred  and  sixty-two  of  these 
persons  in  favor  of  the  present  system  and  against  or  opposed  to  the  license 
system.  Fifty-six  are  in  favor  of  the  license  system,  and  seven  are  undecided 
in  their  opinion.  Of  the  fifty-six  who  are  in  favor  of  the  license  system, 
twenty-five  of  them  are  Roman  Catholic,  eight  Episcopalians,  twelve  Trinita- 
rians, two  Orthodox  Congregationalists,  one  Universalist,  five  Swedenborgian 
and  three  of  unknown  denominations. 

Q.    What  measures  did  you  take  to  ascertain  ? 

A.  I  sent  out  a  circular  to  all  the  clergymen,  irrespective  of  denomina- 
tion, in  the  State,  containing  the  question,  Are  you  in  favor  of  the  repeal  of 
our  prohibitory  liquor  law  ? 

Q.     And  they  answered  yes  or  no  ? 

A.     And  they  answered  yes  or  no. 

Q.     And  the  result  was  nine  hundred  and  sixty-two  to  fifty-six  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.    (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     You  received  nine  hundred  replies,  did  you  ? 

A.     Over  nine  hundred  letters. 

Q.     There  are  how  many  clergymen  ? 
109 


866  APPENDIX. 

A.     About  fourteen  hundred. 

Q.     They  did  not  all  reply  ? 

A.  Oh,  no.  The  whole  number  that  we  have  heard  from  is  one  thousand 
and  twenty-five  ;  but  we  have  received  over  nine  hundred  letters.  A  portion 
of  these  gave  their  names  in  writing  on  remonstrances  against  the  license  law. 

Q.     Did  you  receive  nine  hundred  letters  declaring  distinctly  as  to  opinion  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     No  definition  of  what  the  license  law  was  ? 

A .     No,  sir  ;  simply  the  question.  • 

Q.     Nor  the  provision  proposed  by  anybody  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.    What  was  the  question  which  you  asked  ? 

A.  "  Arc  you  in  favor  of  the  repeal  of  our  present  prohibitory  liquor  law 
or  of  enacting  a  license  law  ?  " 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SHERMAN.)  Do  you  know  others  than  the  fifty-six,  aside 
from  the  answers  to  the  letters  ? 

A.  I  judge  that  there  are  a  few,  as  I  notice  the  testimony  of  some  before 
the  Committee. 

Q.     These  were  not  included  ? 

A.     These  were  not  included. 

Mr.  CHILD.  The  question,  as  it  reads  in  the  printed  circular,  is,  "  Are 
you  in  favor  of  the  repeal  of  our  prohibitory  law  and  enacting  a  license  law  ?  " 

TESTIMONY  OF  EDWARD  JARVIS,  M.  D. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MIXER.)     How  many  years  have  you  been  a  physician  ? 

A.     Thirty-six  years. 

Q.  Have  you  given  special  attention  to  statistics  touching  the  subjects 
here  under  consideration  ? 

A.  I  want  to  state  more  than  statistics.  I  want  to  read  to  you  the  author- 
ity of  one  of  perhaps  the  most  learned  scholars  of  the  present  time.  It  is 
Morel,  of  France,  who  has  been,  during 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Do  you  speak  of  the  French  or  the  English 
copy? 

A .  I  speak  of  the  French  copy.  It  is  a  copy  which  I  procured  myself 
from  France,  being  unable  to  obtain  one  in  this  country.  M.  Morel  was  con- 
nected formerly  with  various  French  hospitals,  and  a  member  of  the  Institute 
or  Academy  of  Sciences ;  and  now  he  writes  this  book, — Des  Degenerescences 
de  I'Espe'ce  Humaine, — not  that  the  whole  generation  is  degenerating,  but 
concerning  the  waste  of  constitutional  force  in  the  human  family.  He  says, 
on  page  48  of  this  treatise,  that  [translating'}  this  is  remarked  "  in  the  abuse 
of  alcoholic  liquors  and  of  certain  narcotics,  such  as  opium.  Under  the  influ- 
ences of  these  poisonous  (toxiques)  agents  there  have  been  produced  perver- 
sions so  great  in  the  functions  of  the  nervous  system  that  in  the  result,  as  we 
have  demonstrated,  are  the  true  degeneracies  of  the  present  time,  whether  in 
influence  direct  from  the  poisonous  agent,  or  by  the  transmission  of  hereditary 
power  in  the  child."  He  says  again  that  "  the  disastrous  effects  produced  in 
the  human  economy  by  the  abuse  of  alcoholic  drinks  constitute  a  malady." 
Then  he  makes  a  reference  to  a  work,  by  a  learned  Swedish  author,  desig- 


APPENDIX.  867 

nated  AlcoJioTismus  clironicus,  saying  that  he  considers  this  one  of  the  most 
effective  of  the  causes  of  degeneracy  in  the  human  race.  lie  says, — "  Alco- 
hol produces  a  malady  which  offers  the  symptoms  of  a  veritable  poison 
(empoisonnement')"  I  would  call  your  attention  to  the  fact  that  it  is  more 
than  an  accident  that  the  same  word  is  used  to  mean  drunkenness,  intoxication 
and  poison.  Toxique  is  the  word  used  for  poison,  and  it  is  more  than  an  acci- 
dent that  this  was  used  to  indicate  the  same  thing.  He  says, — "  Persons 
morbidly  (inaladivemenC)  transformed  in  consequence  of  alcoholic  excess, 
become  a  class  of  degenerated  persons  by  intoxication."  I  merely  report  the 
salient  points.  Worse  than  all  this,  he  says  that  the  alcoholic  influence  viti- 
ates the  constitution  of  the  person  himself  who  drinks,  and  gives  him  a  pow- 
erlcssness  to  transmit  a  full  health  ;  that  he  transmits  the  health  which  he  has 
to  his  offspring,  and  hence  a  health  with  a  similar  constitutional  force,  and 
with  greater  propensities  for  drinking  alcoholic  drinks.  He  then  gives  a  lower 
health  to  the  child,  until  it  at  last  ends  in  powerlessness  to  transmit  health  at 
all.  He  speaks  of  the  influence  of  alcohol  upon  the  heritage  and  the  consti- 
tution :  "  The  physical  degradation,  the  complete  perversion  of  the  intelli- 
gence and  of  the  sentiments  do  not  remain  a  state  of  facts  isolated  and 
belonging  to  the  person  who  has  passed  away,  but  it  is  connected  with  the 
future  and  with  the  descendants.  It  does  not  appear  until  the  victims  of  this 
deplorable  habit  at  last  become  extinguished."  *  I  will  read  one  more  from 
this,  and  then  I  am  done  with  this  book.  He  says  that  the  first  conditions  of 
an  alcoholic  constitution  are  "  immoralite^  depravation,  exces  alcooliques, 
abrutlssement  moral"  The  second  becomes  hereditary  intemperance,  a  danger 
of  excess  and  mania,  and  general  paralysis.  In  the  third  generation  the  tendency 
is  to  hypocondria,  deep  melancholy,  ideas  of  being  persecuted,  and  tenden- 
cies to  homicide.  In  the  fourth  generation  intelligence  is  scarcely  or  slightly 
developed,  with  the  first  access  of  mania  early  in  life,  stupidity,  tendency 
(transition)  to  idiotism,  and  probable  extinction  of  that  family  through  that 
crime.  These  are  my  views.  I  have  looked  at  this  matter  physiologically.  I 
began  early  in  life  to  give  attention  to  the  causes  of  disease.  When  I  was 
yet  a  student  down  here  at  Dr.  Shattuck's,  thirty-seven  or  eight  years  ago, 
the  question  occurred  to  me — What  is  the  cause  of  so  much  disease  ?  I  began 
to  doubt  the  efficacy  of  medicine.  And  from  that  time  I  have  looked  to 
the  origin  of  disease,  and  the  causes  that  vitiate  the  human  constitution,  and 
render  it  susceptible  first  to  disease,  and  then  comparatively  powerless 
to  resist,  and  consequently  more  subject  to  the  final  consequences  of 
disease.  I  will  read  from  an  analysis  in  the  Boston  "  Medical  and  Sur- 
gical Journal"  of  March  22,  1866,  of  an  article  that  I  read  before  the 
Norfolk  District  of  the  Massachusetts  Medical  Society.  Mr.  F.  G.  P.  Nei- 
son,  Actuary  of  the  Medical,  Invalid  and  General  Life  Insurance  Com- 
pany, of  London,  has  taken  great  pains  to  ascertain  the  effect  of  alcoholism 
upon  human  life.  I  should  say  to  you  that  these  figures  refer  only  to  the 
intemperate  class.  It  was  his  intention  to  "  include  only  such  persons  as  were 

*  La  degradation  physique,  la  perversion  complete  de  1'intelligence  et  des  sentiments,  ne 
restent  pas  a  I'etat  de  ces  faits  isoles  qui,  n'ayant  aucun  rapport  ni  avec  le  passe  des  parents, 
ni  avec  Pavenir  des  descendants,  disparaitraient  tot  ou  turd  avec  les  victimes  de  cetto 
deplorable  habitude. 


868  APPENDIX. 

decidedly  addicted  to  drinking  habits,  and  it  was  not  intended  to  bring  within 
observation  mere  occasional  drinkers,  or  what  is  usually  termed  generous  or 
free  livers."  He  says  that  the  result  among  persons  from  20  to  30  years  old, 
among  a  general  population,  was  an  average  of  life  35  per  cent,  of  the  length 
of  life  that  people  should  average.  From  30  to  40,  the  average  was  38  per 
cent,  of  life  compared  with  the  general  population  (which  includes  these  also), 
and  a  loss  of  62  per  cent.  From  40  to  50,  the  average  was  41  per  cent.,  and 
a  loss  of  59.  They  live,  by  this,  less  than  half  of  the  time  that  the  average  of 
people  do  at  that  time.  From  50  to  .60,  the  average  was  51  per  cent,  against 
a  loss  of  49.  At  60  and  over,  the  average  was  63  per  cent.,  and  a  loss  of  37 
per  cent.  Three  life  insurance  companies  in  London,  which  insured  on  a 
general  population,  lost  per  thousand,  13,  14,  15  and  26.  The  Temperance 
Provident  Life  Insurance  Company  lost  but  7^  per  thousand.  I  have  exam- 
ined carefully  and  analyzed  the  reports  of  mortality  from  the  beginning  of 
our  reports,  from  1841  to  1865,  in  Massachusetts,  excluding  Suffolk  County- 
I  find  that  the  ratio  of  those  who  died  from  intemperance,  including  those 
who  died  from  delirium  tremens,  from  1841  to  1850,  was  530  in  a  hundred 
thousand  deaths.  From  1851  to  1854,  it  was  349  in  a  hundred  thousand. 
From  1855  to  1860,  it  was  445  in  a  hundred  thousand.  From  1861  to  1864, 
it  was  365  in  a  hundred  thousand.  And  you  must  remember  that  this  last 
period  would  include  the  Irish  who  bring  a  great  deal  of  excess  of  intemper- 
ance. I  have  had  a  special  reason  for  examining  Lowell,  because  Mr.  Clark 
sent  me  his  book  in  which  he  said  that  intemperance  was  increasing  in  Lowell. 
I  examined  the  reports  from  1841 ;  and  I  find  that  from  1841  to  1851  the 
number  of  deaths  from  intemperance  was  56  in  ten  thousand  of  all  deaths ; 
and  from  1852  to  1865,  there  were  26  deaths  from  intemperance  out  of  ten 
thousand  of  all  the  deaths.  I  have  also  compared  the  proportion  of  deaths 
from  intemperance  to  the  number  of  the  population.  In  the  period  from  1841 
to  1851, 1  find  that  the  proportion  of  deaths  from  intemperance  was  one  in 
8,421  of  the  living  ;  and  in  the  period  from  1852  to  1864  there  was  a  propor- 
tion of  one  in  20,667  of  the  living. 

[The  session  of  the  Committee  Tvas  extended  considerably  beyond  the  usual 
hour  of  adjournment,  and  the  testimony  of  the  last  witness  was  unavoidably 
cut  short,  and  no  opportunity  offered  for  cross-examination.] 

Adjourned. 


APPENDIX.  869 


TWENTY-THIRD  DAY— EVENING  SESSION. 

The  Committee  met  at  7  o'clock,  P.  M.,  for  the  purpose  of  hearing  testimony 
in  support  of  the  petition  from  the  Massachusetts  College  of  Pharmacy. 
Samuel  M.  Colcord,  of  Boston,  presented  a  memorial,  which  he  read,  in  sup- 
port of  the  petition,  and  stated  that  it  was  desired  that  the  Committee  should 
understand  that  those  appearing  in  behalf  of  the  College  of  Pharmacy, 
appeared  not  as  partisans  either  for  or  against  a  license  law,  but  appeared  to 
present  their  case  and  tell  the  whole  truth  as  to  how  they  were  situated,  and 
were  ready  to  answer  any  questions  which  the  Committee  desired  to  ask. 

Aftef  the  reading  of  the  memorial  the  following  witnesses  were  called: — 

TESTIMONY  OF  CHARLES  EDWARD  BUCKINGHAM,  M.  D. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)  You  are  Surgeon  at  the  City  Hospital,  are  you 
not? 

A.    I  am,  sir. 

Q.    How  long  have  you  been  in  practice  of  medicine  ? 

A.     Twenty-two  years  this  month. 

Q.  You  have  had  occasion  every  day  to  use  wines  or  spirits  in  your  prac- 
tice? 

A.     I  should  think  that  I  had. 

Q.  Is  there  anything  else  that  you  can  use  to  take  the  place  of  these 
articles  ? 

A.     That  is  a  question  that  I  cannot  answer.     I  do  not  know. 

Q.  In  your  judgment  do  you  think  it  necessary  for  an  apothecary  to  sell 
wines  and  spirits  and  to  dispense  them  ? 

A.     I  certainly  do. 

Q.  Do  you  think  it  is  proper  to  dispense  with  the  use  of  them  in  the 
practice  of  medicine  ? 

A.    In  my  opinion  it  is  not. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  mixed  or  unmixed ;  that  is,  in  prescriptions  or  in  admin- 
istering generally,  they  are  sold  to  be  used  by  themselves  ? 

A.  I  am  in  the  habit  of  prescribing  wines  and  spirits  for  medicines,  and  for 
officinal  articles. 

Q.  What  is  your  opinion  as  to  the  necessity  of  apothecaries  furnishing 
these  wines  ? 

A.  In  my  opinion  it  is  absolutely  necessary  that  an  apothecary  should 
have  these  wines. 

Q.  Do  you  suppose  that  the  prescriptions  of  physicians  could  be  prepared 
by  the  apothecaries  without  the  liberty  of  using  these  articles  ?  What  is  your 
opinion  of  that  ? 

A.  My  opinion  is  that  they  could  not  be  properly  prepared  by  the  liquor 
furnished  by  the  agents. 

Q.    Is  that  general  opinion  ? 


870  APPENDIX. 

A.    I  could  not  answer. 

Q.     The  apothecaries  then  furnish  you  with  good  articles  of  this  kind  ? 

A.     When  they  do  not,  I  send  them  back. 

Q.  Have  you  anything  to  show  the  proportion  of  wines  that  you  use,  that 
the  apothecaries  furnish,  as  compared  with  those  that  are  furnished  by  fami- 
lies ?  The  question  is,  if  you  want  to  use  wines  or  spirits  in  private  practice, 
whether  you  give  your  directions  to  the  families  to  use  so  much  of  wines  and 
spirits,  letting  them  get  the  articles  where  they  have  a  mind  to,  or  whether 
you  send  to  an  apothecary  ? 

A.  I  do  both  ways.  When  I  am  prescribing  in  a  family  where  I  have 
every  reason  to  believe  that  they  keep  good  wines  and  spirits,  and  I  think  it 
necessary  that  the  patient  should  have  good  wine  or  good  spirit,  I  direct  them 
what  to  give  ;  but  if  I  have  occasion  to  know  that  they  are  not  in  the  habit 
of  having  good  wines  or  good  spirits,  I  am  in  the  habit  of  sending  them  to  an 
apothecary,  if  I  know  of  a  good  one  in  the  vicinity  that  I  can  rely  upon,  or  I 
send  them  to  a  wholesale  dealer  down  town.  For  example,  I  have  been  in 
the  habit  of  writing  for  particular  articles  with  directions  that  they  should  be 
mixed  with  brandy  or  whiskey  or  gin,  if  you  please,  and  in  some  families  I 
would  order  them  to  get  the  articles  already  mixed — being  always  in  the  habit 
of  giving  written  directions,  and  not  directions  by  word  of  mouth. 

Q.  You  practise  in  some  families  where  there  is  more  or  less  difficulty  or 
inconvenience  for  them  to  get  the  liquors,  and  where  it  is  impossible,  and 
where  it  is  absolutely  necessary  that  an  apothecary  should  furnish  them 
with  the  medicine  ? 

A.  I  do,  in  a  great  many  such  families ;  I  have  done  that  thing  within  a 
few  weeks,  and  I  have  had  a  child  under  my  care,  not  six  years  of  age,  who 
for  a  fortnight  I  think  took  nothing  but  brandy  and  water,  and  at  the  rate  of 
half  a  pint  of  brandy  a  day,  and  it  was  all  that  kept  the  child  alive.  Jt  was 
all  that  it  would  take.  It  was  given  as  a  medicine  and  food.  lie  then  got 
tired  of  it  and  took  it  in  the  form  of  milk  punch,  and  •  finally  the  child  got 
tired  of  that,  and  refused  to  take  it  altogether.  Notwithstanding  the  state- 
ments which  have  been  made  on  this  stand,  I  think  that  almost  all  persons, 
to  whom  wines  and  spirits  are  prescribed  as  medicine,  get  disgusted  with  the 
articles  sooner  or  later,  and  do  not  take  them  at  all.  I  have  known  that  to 
be  the  case  over  and  over  and  over  again. 

Q.  You  do  not  think  that  it  induces  a  habit  of  using  these  articles  as  a 
drink? 

A.  I  think  it  is  a  very  common  thing  for  people  to  attribute  to  the 
physician  the  habit  of  drinking  that  they  have  formed  ;  but  my  own  impres- 
sion is  that,  so  far  as  my  observation  goes,  those  who  have  begun  to  take  these 
medicines  get  tired  and  disgusted  with  them  precisely  as  they  are  disgusted 
with  castor  oil  and  senna  tea. 

Q.  The  amount  of  wines  and  liquors  used  in  medicine,  have  you  any 
idea  of  the  proportion  they  bear  to  other  medicines  ?  Should  you  think  it 
was  as  much  as  half,  or  as  much  as  ten  per  cent.,  or  how  ?  What  would  be 
the  average  amount  of  spirits  used  among  the  medical  profession  ?  What 
proportion  does  it  bear  to  other  medicines  ? 


APPENDIX.  871 

A.  I  know  nothing  about  anybody's  else  practice.  There  is  not  a  day 
passes  when  I  do  not  prescribe  some  kind  of  wine  or  spirit,  in  some  form  or 
other ;  sometimes  simply  in  the  form  of  wine  or  spirit,  sometimes  in  the 
form  of  a  tincture,  and  sometimes  to  be  mixed  with  other  articles,  and 
possibly  it  is  given  sometimes  in  the  form  of  ale  or  cider  or  porter. 

Q.    Is  it  used  extensively  in  the  Hospital  ? 

A .  It  is  used,  I  have  no  doubt,  very  extensively  there.  There  is  probably  not 
a  day  passes  but  that  it  is  used,  either  in  the  form  of  brandy  or  ale  or  porter 
or  gin  or  some  other  preparation.  There  is  not  a  day  passes  that  I  do  not  pre- 
scribe it  for  some  one  myself.  I  have  at  the  present  time,  somewhere  in  the 
neighborhood  of  forty  surgical  patients.  My  impressson  is  that  out  of  that 
number  there  are  those  who  are  taking  New  England  rum,  and  there  may  be 
some  more  who  are  taking  ale.  There  may  be  six  who  are  taking  New 
England  rum,  and  there  may  be  as  many  more  who  are  taking  ale.  I  do  not 
think  I  am  giving  any  patient  brandy  at  the  present  time.  I  prefer  rum  for 
the  reason  that  I  should  feel  more  confident  that  they  would  get  good  rum. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  You  make  a  remark  that  if  you  were  in  the 
neighborhood  of  a  good  apothecary  you  would  send  to  such  an  apothecary  as 
you  could  trust.  There  are  apothecaries  then,  I  take  it,  whom  you  would 
not  like  to  send  to  ? 

A.     There  certainly  are,  sir. 

Q.  How  many  apothecaries  do  you  think  there  are  in  the  city  of  Boston 
whom  you  would  rely  upon  ? 

A.  I  could  not  give  you  an  answer  in  numbers;  but  if  the  apothecaries 
were  enabled  to  carry  out  the  plans  which  I  understand  they  have  for  years 
been  attempting  to  carry  out,  and  prevent  any  one  from  coming  into  the 
business  who  is  not  competent  as  a  pharmaceutist,  it  would  not  be  too  many 
to  license  them  all. 

Q.    About  how  many  would  there  be  likely  to  be  ? 

A.  I  could  not  tell  you  anything  about  it.  I  should  make  provision  that 
every  profession  should  be  properly  guarded  in  this  respect,  and  I  understand 
that  the  apothecaries  have  been  endeavoring  to  restrict  from  selling  as  apoth- 
ecaries all  those  who  are  not  competent  to  perform  the  duties  of  an  apoth- 
ecary ;  and  if  they  are  not  fit  to  do  that  they  are  not  fit  to  cany  on  any  other 
department  of  business  in  connection  with  this,  as  important  as  the  dispensing 
of  liquor. 

Q.  You  are  aware,  are  you  not,  that  the  city  authorities  may  appoint  as 
many  apothecaries  to  sell  as  they  please  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  anything  about  it,  they  are  changing  the  law  so  often. 

Q.    Have  you  any  idea  how  many  apothecaries  there  are  in  Boston  ? 

A.    I  could  not  tell. 

TESTIMONY  OF  HENRY  W.  LINCOLN. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)  You  are  Secretary  of  the  Massachusetts  College 
of  Pharmacy  ? 

A.    lam,  sir. 

Q.  You  have  looked  at  this  law,  and  you  understand  the  meaning  of  pure 
alcohol.  Let  me  ask  you  what  your  understanding  of  the  law  is  in  relation 


872  APPENDIX. 

to  your  permission  to  sell  under  the  law  V  The  law  states  that  druggists  may 
sell  to  other  druggists  and  to  apothecaries  and  physicians,  pure  alcohol,  and 
that  only.  Now  what  is  your  idea  about  that  ?  What  is  your  understanding 
of  pure  alcohol  ? 

A.     Do  you  ask  what  it  is  chemically,  without  any  mixture  of  water  ? 

Q.     Do  your  books  tell  you  that  that  is  pure  alcohol  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  know  whether  the  law  meant  it  to  be  pure  alcohol  or  not  ? 

A.  I  do  not,  sir.  I  presume,  sir,  however,  that  the  law  should  be  under- 
stood critically. 

Q.     Will  you  state  what  a  druggist  is  ? 

A.  A  druggist,  by  common  usage,  is  a  person  who  buys  and  sells  but  does 
not  prepare  medicines. 

Q.     What  is  an  apothecary  ? 

A .  One  who  prepares  medicines,  a  pharmaceutist,  or  a  retail  seller.  In  short 
a  druggist  may  be  considered  as  a  wholesaler,  and  an  apothecary  as  a  retailer. 
They  are  entirely  different. 

Q.     Your  idea  is  that  an  apothecary  has  no  right  to  sell  to  any  one  ? 

A.     According  to  the  law  he  has  not. 

Q.     That  is  your  understanding  of  it  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;  as  I  understand  the  law. 

Q.     lie  has  then  no  right  to  sell  to  a  physician  ? 

A.     No,  sir ;  nor  to  sell  to  a  brother  apothecary 

Q.  Now  as  to  the  wines  that  you  have  to  use.  I  take  it  that  you  consider 
it  a  necessary  part  of  your  business  to  dispense  them  with  medicines.  Do 
you.  think  that  the  demand  on  the  apothecary  is  imperative  to  furnish  these 
wines  and  liquors  ? 

A.     As  necessary  as  any  article  that  we  have. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  an  apothecary  can  properly  answer  the  necessary 
calls  made  on  him  without  being  enabled  to  furnish  wines  and  spirits  ? 

A.  I  do  not  see  where  he  can  draw  the  line  in  a  critical  consideration  of 
the  law. 

Q.  Have  you  any  idea  when  the  article  ceases  to  be  a  drug  and  becomes 
an  intoxicating  drink  ?  I  suppose  that  you  consider  the  article  as  a  scientific 
preparation.  Where  is  the  dividing  line  where  it  ceases  to  be  wine  and 
becomes  a  drug,»under  this  law  ?  It  says  mixed  and  unmixed.  Can  you  divide 
them  ?  What  should  you  do  with  red  lavender  ?  Is  not  that  a  prescrip- 
tion that  a  person  may  get  in  such  a  quantity,  that  he  may  obtain  a  large 
amount  of  alcohol  from,  it  ? 

A.     Certainly. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  the  law  is  so  considered  that  you  cannot  sell 
lavender  ? 

A.     I  think  it  might  be  understood  so. 

Q.  How  many  articles  would  you  have  to  dispense,  if  you  should  attempt 
to  draw  the  line  into  the  preparation  of  these  articles,  when  the  dividing  line 
is  so  confused  that  you  cannot  determine  it  with  precision  ?  Did  you  ever 
know  anybody  to  get  intoxicated  on  cologne  water  ? 


APPENDIX.  873 

A.  No,  sir ;  I  have  heard  of  it ;  but  it  has  never  come  under  my  obser- 
vation. 

Q.     How  is  it  with  tincture  of  gentian  ? 

A.  That  is  another  article  that  contains  alcohol,  and  also  a  small  propor- 
tion of  opium,  and  might  be  used  on  that  account. 

Q.     And  that  is,  as  an  intoxicating  beverage  ? 

A.  Certainly  it  might.  I  have  often  been  troubled  in  regard  to  drawing 
the  dividing  line  in  regard  to  these  articles. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  You  understand  the  provision  in  the  statutes  in 
regard  to  the  authority  in  cities  and  towns  to  appoint  agents.  Why  does  not 
that  meet  your  case  ? 

A.  The  difficulty  is  that  we  are  obliged  to  keep  a  different  set  of  books, 
and  keep  accounts  of  every  article  that  we  buy  and  sell,  and  we  are  also 
obliged  to  buy  of  the  State  Agent  every  article  that  we  want. 

Q.    Why  is  that  not  sufficient  ?     What  trouble  is  there  about  that  ? 

A.     The  general  opinion  is,  that  a  person  can  do  better. 

Q.     In  what  respect,  better  ? 

A.     By  supplying  our  customers  with  an  article  that  we  can  rely  upon. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  a  practising  apothecary  ? 

A.     Twenty  years. 

Q.  And  you  have  been  in  the  habit  of  purchasing  the  wines  that  you  use 
for  physicians'  prescriptions  of  the  wholesale  dealers,  and  have  been  in  the 
habit  of  retailing  simply  for  medicinal  purposes  V 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Now  you  think  that  you  could  not  supply  yourself  as  well  from  the 
State  Agency  ? 

A.     I  could  not  tell,  sir,  until  I  tried. 

Q.     Have  you  ever  tried  ? 

A.  I  have  not  tried  ;  but  it  would  be  the  general  opinion,  as  it  has  been 
expressed,  that  we  could  do  better,  and  I  do  not  know  of  an  agent  appointed 
in  Boston.  I  do  not  know  whether  there  are  any  sub-agents  in  Boston,  and  I 
presume  I  could  not  buy-of  the  State  Commissioner. 

Q.  Should  you  be  willing  as  an  apothecary  to  go  into  the  business  of 
selling  as  town  agent  ? 

A.     I  should  not,  myself,  under  the  present  state  of  things  in  Boston. 

Q.    Is  that  the  only  trouble  the  apothecaries  complain  of? 

A.     That  is  one  of  the  troubles. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  AVERT.)  Would  your  duty,  as  an  apothecary,  combining 
medicines,  interfere  with  your  duties  as  a  town  agent  ? 

A .     It  would  very  much. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Would  there,  or  not,  be  many  cases,  supposing 
that  you  were  acting  as  an  apothecary,  and  doing  a  general  business,  and  also 
acting  as  general  agent  in  the  city  of  Boston,  in  which  it  would  be  impossible 
for  you  to  tell  whether  you  ought  to  make  your  record  of  a  given  prescription, 
on  your  private  books,  or  on  your  public  agency  books  ? 

A.    It  would  be  very  difficult;  as  difficult  as  it  would  be  to  draw  the  line 
between  those  who  are  intoxicated,  and  those  who  are  not. 
110 


874  APPENDIX. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  AVERT.)  As  an  apothecary,  is  it  not  a  custom  for  you  to 
receive  prescriptions  for  wines  in  their  simple  state,  uncombined  with  medi- 
cines, and  also  other  alcoholic  combinations,  and  as  you  consider  the  law,  and 
as  the  letter  of  the  law  reads,  you  do  not  feel  yourself  at  liberty  to  comply 
with  these  prescriptions  except  in  violation  of  the  law  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Supposing  that  you  make  a  purchase  of  a  town 
agent  of  an  article  of  brandy  or  champagne,  and  it  turns  out  to  be  impure  or 
defective,  do  you  understand  that  you  have  a  reclamation  on  the  State,  or 
any  right  to  action  against  the  agent  ? 

A.     I  have  not  examined  the  law  sufficiently  to  know. 

Q.  That  would  be  something  of  importance,  would  it  not  ?  When  you 
make  purchases  you  rely  something  upon  the  personal  responsibility  or  the 
business  honor  of  the  man  of  whom  you  purchase  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir;  certainly  I  do;  on  the  same  ground  as  any  other  articles, 
where  if  you  do  not  like  them  you  can  return  them. 

Q,     (By  Mr.  AA^ERY.)     How  long  have  you  been  an  apothecary  ? 

A.     Twenty  years,  or  more. 

Q.     You  say  you  never  have  tried  to  conform  with  this  law  ? 

A.  That  is  the  inference  that  would  be  drawn,  I  suppose,  from  my 
testimony. 

Q.  You  say  that  you  never  asked  for  an  appointment  from  the  Mayor  and 
Aldermen  ? 

A.     I  never  have. 

Q.  In  short  you  have  made  no  attempt  to  prosecute  your  business  in 
conformity  with  this  law  ? 

A.     The  reason,  I  have  stated. 

Q.  What  per  cent,  of  your  business  has  to  do  with  spirits  and  alcohol  ? 
Of  all  your  sales  what  proportion  comes  under  the  class  of  spirituous  and 
intoxicating  liquors  ? 

A.  Well,  I  can  hardly  tell.  It  is  an  estimate  that  I  had  not  thought  of 
making,  but  I  think  it  would  range  between  ten  and  twenty  per  cent.  It 
would  fall  short  of  the  highest  and  would  overrun  the  lowest. 

Q.  Now,  when  you  use  spirituous  liquor  in  combining  medicines,  after  it 
has  entered  into  combination,  you  give  that  as  some  other  article  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Has  it  not  lost,  then,  its  essential  character  ? 

A.     Its  character  is  changed,  but  it  contains  spirituous  liquor. 

Q.  You  take  the  spirituous  liquor  and  combine  it,  so  that  the  liquor  becomes 
solid  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  think  there  is  no  violation  of  law  in  selling  that  solid  com- 
pound ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  If  you  take  spirituous  liquor  and  make  cologne  water,  has  the  article 
not  lost  its  distinctive  character  ? 

A,     No,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  think  that  you  cannot  sell  cologne  water  ? 


APPENDIX.  875 

A.     I  think  that  if  the  law  is  not  interpreted  strictly  you  can. 

Q.  After  putting  the  view  upon  it  that  you  have,  do  you  think  that  you 
would  not  be  at  liberty  to  sell  a  bottle  of  cologne  water  ? 

A.  I  do.  You  speak  of  a  compound  of  alcohol  in  a  solid  state.  In  that 
state  the  alcohol  has  wholly  evaporated,  of  course.  Then  it  has  lost  its  dis- 
tinctive character ;  but  it  is  different  with  cologne  water.  It  has  more  alcohol 
than  almost  any  other  article  we  sell.  I  might  say  that  it  contains  more  than 
any  article  that  we  sell,  and  in  fact  it  is  sometimes  used  for  intoxicating 
purposes. 

Q.    You  also  have  a  class  of  articles  called  tinctures  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Into  which  these  intoxicating  liquors  are  put,  which  are  strictly  medi- 
cinal. You  do  not  call  them  in  any  degree  intoxicating  then,  do  you  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  when  they  contain  spirituous  liquors. 

TESTIMONY  or  JAMES  L.  HUNT. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)     Are  you  an  apothecary  ? 

A.    I  am. 

Q.    For  how  long  have  you  been  ? 

A.     Eighteen  years. 

Q.    Your  residence  is  in  Hingham  ? 

A.    It  is. 

Q.  Have  you  been  an  agent  for  the  sale  of  liquor  in  Hingham  at  any 
time  ? 

A.    I  have. 

Q.    What  induced  you  to  accept  the  agency  ? 

A.  The  expectation  that  I  might  furnish  liquor  for  medicinal  purposes  in 
connection  with  my  other  business. 

Q.  You  conceived  it  then  to  be  your  duty  as  an  apothecary  in  furnishing 
the  citizens  of  Hingham  with  other  medicines,  to  sell  also  spirituous  liquors  ? 

A.     I  did. 

Q.  Do  you  think  an  apothecary  can  properly  perform  the  duties  of  his 
profession  unless  he  is  permitted  to  furnish  wines  and  spirits  ? 

A.    I  did  not  say  so  ;  but  he  cannot  perform  all  his  duties. 

Q.  As  a  town  agent,  and  having  a  knowledge  of  this  subject,  do  you 
think  that  apothecaries  in  Massachusetts  and  apothecaries  in  general  are  a 
reliable  class  to  whom  to  intrust  the  sale  of  liquors  as  medicines  ? 

A.  My  knowledge  of  that  class  is  rather  limited,  but  I  am  decidedly  of  the 
opinion  that  they  are  a  proper  class. 

Q.  You  say  that  the  apothecary  business  could  not  be  properly  carried  on 
without  the  selling  of  wines  and  spirits,  and  therefore  you  accepted  the  agency 
at  that  time  ? 

A.     That  is  the  reason,  and  the  only  reason  why  I  accepted  it. 

Q.  If  you  could  be  permitted  as  an  apothecary  to  furnish  wines  and  spirits 
for  medicines  and  mechanical  purposes  and  for  the  arts,  would  you  have 
accepted  the  agency  ? 

A.  I  would  not ;  I  regard  the  agency  business  as  rather  incompatible  with 
my  business. 


876  APPENDIX. 

Q.     You  have  to  buy  your  wines  and  spirits  at  the  State  Agency  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.  I  wish  to  inquire  whether  the  articles  which  you  have  procured  at  the 
State  Agency  are,  in  your  opinion,  fit  for  medicinal  use  ?  Were  they  gener- 
ally reliable  articles  ? 

A.  So  far  as  I  can  judge,  I  have  generally  been  satisfied;  but  in  a  few 
instances  the  articles  that  I  have  obtained  there  have  not  quite  satisfied  me. 

Q.     Can  you  not  rely  upon  the  analysis  of  the  State  Assayer  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  it  is  to  be  relied  upon  entirely  as  to  the  quality  of  the 
wines  and  liquors. 

Q.  Do  you  mean  to  say  that  the  certificate  of  the  State  Assayer,  is  not  a 
sufficient  guaranty  to  you  that  the  liquors  you  obtain  at  the  State  Agency  are 
pure  and  fit  for  medicinal  use  ? 

A.  I  think  that  the  certificate  of  the  State  Assayer  that  they  do  not  con- 
tain any  deleterious  matter,  and  in  respect  to  their  purity,  is  sufficient ;  but 
there  are  other  qualities  to  be  considered  in  purchasing  liquor.  The  age,  for 
instance,  determines  the  quality. 

Q.     Does  not  the  certificate  give  you  the  quality  on  account  of  age  ? 

A.    It  does  not. 

Q.  Suppose  that  you  are  buying  whiskey  for  medicinal  purposes,  at  the 
State  Agency,  can  you  go  there  and  obtain  almost  any  quality  of  whiskey 
that  you  want  ? 

A.  We  can ;  and  I  understand  them  to  be  pure,  so  far  as  not  containing 
any  deleterious  matter  is  concerned. 

Q.  The  usual  deleterious  article  in  whiskey  is  fusel  oil.  Do  you  under- 
stand the  analysis  to  say  whether  the  whiskey  does  or  does  not  contain  any 
fusel  oil  ? 

A.     The  statistics  show  that. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  How  is  the  purchaser  of  liquor  to  find  out 
whether  it  is  pure  or  not  ? 

A.  In  the  remark  I  made  about  the  certificate  of  the  State  Assayer,  I  do 
not  mean  to  be  understood  as  saying  that  it  did  not  show  the  purity  of  the 
article  ;  but  I  suppose  that  most  every  one  knows  that  unripe  whiskey  is  unfit 
for  medical  purposes. 

Q.  How  is  a  purchaser  to  know  whether  the  article  of  whiskey  which  he 
buys  is  a  good  whiskey,  in  a  medical  sense  ;  or,  on  the  other  hand,  if  unripe 
whiskey  is  unfit  for  medicine,  how  can  a  purchaser  determine  when  purchas- 
ing liquor  of  the  State  Commissioner,  whether  the  whiskey  he  gets  is  ripe  or 
unripe  ? 

A.  I  could  not  give  you  any  scientific  rule  to  go  by.  lean  only  judge 
that  the  article  is  old  or  new. 

Q.  You  mean  that  as  a  trained  and  educated  pharmaceutist  you  can  form 
a  judgment  as  to  the  ripeness  of  an  article  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  But  how  are  ignorant  and  untrained  people,  who  go  with  a  physician's 
certificate  to  the  town  agent  to  procure  whiskey,  to  know  anything  about  the 
article  that  we  get  ?  Is  there  any  test  which  we  can  apply,  and  by  which  we 


APPENDIX.  87T 

may  know  whether  we  are  buying  a  good  medicinal  article  or  not,  or  must 
we  trust  to  the  town  agent  as  if  he  were  an  apothecary  ? 

A .     Very  much  depends  upon  that. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)  Do  you  say  that  you  can  go  and  buy  whiskey 
from  the  dollar-and-a-half  whiskey  to  the  six  dollar  article  ? 

A.    I  have  not  heard  of  whiskey  at  so  low  a  price  as  a  dollar  and  a  half. 

Q.    But  you  can  get  any  quality  of  whiskey  that  you  want  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  all  the  whiskeys  that  you  obtain  at  the  State  Agency  are  accom- 
panied by  the  chemist's  certificate  that  they  are  pure  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Is  the  same  true  of  the  wines  and  brandies  ?  Can  you  go  to  the  State 
Agency  as  to  any  liquor  store  and  buy  any  quality  of  brandy  or  wine  that 
you  want  ? 

A.  I  suppose  that  they  keep  none  but  what  they  consider  suitable  for 
medicinal  purposes. 

Q.  I  am  not  speaking  about  what  they  consider.  The  price  covers  the 
quality,  does  it  not,  to  some  extent  ? 

A.     They  keep  different  prices  of  brandy. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Is  there  any  way  in  which  the  public,  when  they 
go  to  the  State  or  town  agent  to  purchase  liquor,  can  know  that  they  are 
obtaining  a  proper  article  for  medicinal  use  ? 

A.     I  cannot  answer  that  question. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)  As  an  apothecary,  you  have  your  customers  who 
go  to  your  store  for  articles  of  medicine  ? 

A.    Yes. 

Q.  Then,  as  a  State  Agent,  you  have  a  lot  of  customers  who  come  there 
for  all  sorts  of  purposes  ? 

A.    Yes. 

Q.  In  the  calls  for  those  articles,  which  you  sell  as  a  State  Agent,  is  there 
a  demand  for  low-priced  whiskey  for  mechanical  purposes  and  for  the  arts  ? 

A.    Yes. 

Q.     And  you  have  occasion  to  refuse  those  people  a  great  many  times  ? 

A.    I  refuse  them  when  I  think  there  is  a  just  cause  for  refusal. 

Q.  As  an  apothecary  and  town  agent,  is  there  any  law  by  which  you  arc 
compelled  to  supply  a  man  with  the  articles  for  which  he  asks  when  you  have 
reason  to  suppose  that  he  wants  them  for  intoxicating  purposes  ?  Have  you 
the  right  to  refuse  to  sell  to  him  when  he  states  that  be  wants  them  for 
mechanical  purposes  ? 

A.    I  could  not  state  the  law  upon  the  subject. 

Q.  Are  you  obliged  to  take  the  testimony  of  a  man  as  to  the  purpose  for 
which  he  wants  the  liquor  ? 

A.    I  exercise  my  own  discretion  in  selling. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  Do  you  not  know  that  the  State  Assayer  can 
determine  by  his  analysis  the  impurity  as  well  as  the  purity  of  an  article  ? 

A.  In  the  articles  that  I  have  received  from  him  or  which  I  have  had 
analyzed  by  him,  the  impurity  is  generally  stated. 


878  APPENDIX. 

Q.  So  that  lie  can  satisfy  you  as  to  the  impurity  of  liquor  as  well  as  its 
purity  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     For  how  long  have  you  been  a  town  agent  ? 

A.     From  eight  to  ten  years. 

Q.     In  the  same  place  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  What  is  the  practical  difficulty  in  carrying  on  the  town  agency  at  the 
same  time  with  your  general  business  as  an  apothecary  ? 

A.     I  think  it  tends  to  divert  the  mind. 

Q.     I  want  you  to  state  the  practical  difficulties  ? 

A.  I  will  state  them.  It  is  practically  certain  that  if  a  man  is  engaged  in 
putting  up  a  very  concentrated  poison,  the  practical  difficulty  would  be  that 
he  would  be  interrupted  by  those  who  wanted  to  purchase  liquors.  That  is 
one  difficulty.  Another  objection  is  that  we  have  to  keep  two  sets  of  books 
instead  of  one.  We  are  compelled  by  law  to  keep  a  separate  set  of  books 
containing  the  accounts  of  the  liquor  sold. 

Q.     Are  there  any  other  difficulties  ? 

A.     Those  are  the  principal  ones. 

Q.  Are  you  not  just  as  much  disturbed  when  you  are  putting  up  your 
concentrated  poison  by  parties  who  come  in  with  prescriptions  from  the 
physicians  for  anything  else  beside  liquor.  Would  not  any  other  call  disturb 
you  just  as  much  as  a  call  for  liquor  ? 

A.     I  think  not. 

Q.  Would  it  not  if  you  had  to  turn  away  from  your  business  and  put  up 
another  kind  of  medicine  than  the  one  that  you  are  engaged  in  preparing  ? 

A.     It  would  not  disturb  me  so  much. 

Q.  It  would  then  really  disturb  you  more  to  furnish  a  pint  of  gin  than  to 
put  up  another  kind  of  medicine  ? 

A.    It  would. 

Q.     Why  ? 

A.  For  one  thing  I  have  to  leave  the  room  to  get  the  gin.  I  should  not 
keep  the  liquor  in  the  room  with  my  other  preparations,  and  the  getting  of 
liquor  would  involve  considerable  manual  labor.  If  a  prescription  of  a  physi- 
cian for  instance  was  for  four  ounces  of  wine  I  would  take  it  from  a  shelf 
near  by. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MORSE.)     Do  you  receive  a  salary  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     What  is  your  salary  ? 

A.     One  hundred  dollars. 

Q.  Is  that  salary  the  only  compensation  that  you  get  for  any  amount  of 
sale  that  you  make  ? 

A.     It  is. 

Q.  Then  all  the  sales  that  you  make  as  town  agent  are  made  without  an 
opportunity  to  get  the  same  compensation  that  you  would  receive  by  way  of 
profit,  if  you  sold  them  in  your  regular  business  as  an  apothecary  ? 

A.  I  make  no  profit  on  the  liquors.  Instructions  are  given  me  to  furnish 
articles  at  as  low  a  price  as  will  be  sufficient  to  cover  the  expense. 


APPENDIX.  879 

Q.  (By  Mr.  McCLELLAN.)  Do  you  consider  that  apothecaries  are  as 
well  qualified  for  the  position  of  town  or  State  agent  as  any  other  class  of 
persons  ? 

A .  If  I  was  not  one  of  them,  I  should  think  them  better  qualified  than 
any  other  class.  They  would  certainly  be  as  well  qualified  as  any  other. 

TESTIMONY  OF  WILLIAM  T.  RAND. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)  You  were  formerly  an  apothecary  were  you 
not? 

A.    I  was. 

Q.     Where  were  you  in  business  ? 

A.    In  Dedham. 

Q.     For  how  long  have  you  been  an  apothecary  ? 

A.     About  twenty-three  years,  including  my  apprenticeship. 

Q.     You  went  out  of  business  in  Dedham  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir.    I  closed  up  and  sold  out. 

Q.  Will  you  please  state  to  the  Committee  why  you  left  the  drug  business  ? 
I  understand  that  you  left  it  for  some  cause  connected  with  the  business. 

A.  I  had  been  in  Dedham  about  a  year  when  the  law  was  passed  that 
liquor  should  be  sold  only  by  agents;  that  each  town  should  appoint  an 
agent  under  the  restrictions  of  the  law,  and  the  agency  was  offered  to  me ; 
but  the  restrictions  imposed  by  the  law  were  such  that  I  could  not  accept  it. 
It  would  interfere  too  much  with  my  general  business  as  an  apothecary.  I 
declined  to  take  it  on  account  of  the  restrictions  that  were  imposed  upon  the 
sale  of  liquor.  The  agents  were  required  by  the  statute  to  take  the  date  of 
the  sale  and  the  name  of  the  party  purchasing ;  and  as  I  was  so  little 
acquainted  with  the  citizens  that  I  should  have  been  obliged  to  ask  them  their 
names,  I  objected  to  taking  it,  and  notified  the  selectmen  that  when  they  did 
appoint  an  agent  I  would  cease  the  selling  of  liquor  as  a  medicine.  They 
neglected  to  appoint  an  agent,  and  I  continued  selling  liquor,  using  the  same, 
discretion  that  I  should  in  selling  opium  or  arsenic,  and  endeavoring  to  be 
posted  up  and  to  know  who  would  be  safe  persons  to  sell  to  and  who  unsafe. 
Being  a  stranger  there,  I  was  more  liable  to  be  imposed  upon ;  but  after 
using  all  the  precaution  that  I  could  in  my  sales  I  was  prosecuted  ;  and  I  felt 
then  that  if  I  could  not  carry  on  my  legitimate  business  that  I  had  been 
following  for  twenty-three  years,  and  selling  all  articles  of  medicine  without 
restriction  when  called  for  upon  the  prescription  of  a  physician,  I  would 
relinquish  the  business,  for  I  could  not  continue  it  without  violating  the  laws 
of  the  Commonwealth. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  you  could  not  continue  the  business  of  an  apoth- 
ecary without  being  obliged  to  dispense  those  articles  ? 

A.     I  do.     I  have  got  up  at  midnight  to  dispense  that  article  alone. 

Q.     And  that  is  the  reason  why  you  left  the  business  ? 

A.    It  is. 

Q.  Do  you  look  upon  the  apothecaries  as  they  run,  as  being  a  class  reliable 
enough  to  be  intrusted  with  the  sale  of  spirituous  liquors  ? 

A.    I  do. 


880  APPENDIX. 

Q.    Do  you  consider  that  a  provision  of  the  law  allowing  apothecaries  to 
sell  would  be  a  proper  one  ? 
•A.    I  do. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  there  would  be  any  advantage  taken  of  the  privi- 
lege ? 

A.    I  do  not. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  I  understand  you  say  that  you  did  not  feel  that  it 
was  compatible  for  you,  in  your  business  as  an  apothecary  to  attempt  to 
comply  with  the  restrictions  imposed  upon  you  as  an  agent  ? 

A.     It  was  not. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Do  you  say  that  you  have  given  up  the  apothe- 
cary business  in  Dedham  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Are  there  any  apothecaries  there  now  ? 

A.     There  are. 

Q.     Are  any  of  them  agents  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know. 

Q.  Do  you  know  that  apothecaries  are  very  generally  throughout  the 
country  appointed  as  agents  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  that  they  are. 

Q.  If,  when  you  gave  up  the  business,  there  had  been  no  apothecary  left, 
and  if,  when  any  one  re-opened  the  business,  he  must  do  it  upon  the  condition 
of  taking  the  town  agency,  do  you  suppose  that  any  one  would  refuse  to  open 
an  apothecary  shop  because  that  condition  was  imposed  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know.     The  compensation  was  only  fifty  dollars. 

Q.  Do  you  understand  that  apothecaries  were  usually  prosecuted  for 
violating  the  law  ? 

A.    No,  sir  ;  I  do  not. 

Q.  Did  you  ever  hear  of  a  man  being  prosecuted  for  selling  mixtures  m 
which  alcohol  was  a  constituent  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

TESTIMONY  OF  CHARLES  C.  BIXBY. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)     You  are  an  apothecary  in  North  Bridgewater  ? 

A.    I  am. 

Q.     For  how  long  have  you  been  an  apothecary  there  ? 

A .     Fifteen  years. 

Q.  You  have  had  occasion  to  sell  wines  and  spirits,  and  you  believe  the 
sale  necessary  in  the  apothecary's  business,  do  you  not  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  he  can  do  justice  to  his  business  without  selling 
them. 

Q.  Have  you  had  any  trouble  in  Bridgewater  about  selling  ?  Have  you 
been  prosecuted  or  arrested  for  making  sales  in  your  business  ? 

A.    I  have  been  arrested  and  prosecuted. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MORSE.)     For  doing  what  ? 

A.  Perhaps  I  should  say  that  previous  to  the  prosecution,  the  grocers  in 
our  town  bought  and  sold  a  quantity  of  Spear's  Sambucci  or  elderberry  wine. 
The  agent  or  manufacturer  himself  came  to  our  place  to  sell  us  some,  and  we 


APPENDIX.  881 

refused  to  buy,  because  we  were  not  allowed  to  soil  it  under  the  law.  He  sold, 
however,  to  nearly  every  grocer  in  town,  and  they  kept  and  sold  it  for  some 
time.  After  somo  time,  and  finding  that  no  fault  was  found  with  them  for  sell- 
ing the  article,  I  supposed  there  would  be  no  objection  offered  to  my  selling  a 
superior  article  of  wine.  I  accordingly  purchased  and  did  sell,  in  moderate 
quantities,  some  California  wine.  The  matter  ran  along  a  year  or  two,  and 
then  notice  was  given  both  to  the  grocers  and  to  myself— the  usual  notice,  I 
presume — notifying  us  to  stop  the  sale  of  such  articles.  I  did  so  and  I  sup- 
posed that  the  others  did.  I  will  state,  however,  that  during  this  time  I  had 
sold  alcohol  in  limited  quantities  for  medicinal  and  mechanical  purposes,  but  I 
did  not  keep  any  kind  of  liquor  upon  draft.  This  notice  was'left  with  me 
about  the  9th  of  March,  1866,  and  I  at  once  discontinued  the  sale  of  every- 
thing of  the  kind.  Some  weeks  elapsed,  and  I  supposed  that  the  matter  had 
ended,  when  a  writ  was  issued  and  served  for  me  to  appear  before  the  justice 
for  selling  liquor  contrary  to  law.  I  appeared  before  the  justice  on  the  after- 
noon of  the  same  day,  and  found  there  a  number  of  witnesses,  perhaps  a 
dozen,  who  were  summoned  to  testify  against  me.  They  were  put  upon  the 
stand,  and  out  of  that  number  three  testified  to  having  bought  liquor  of  me, 
not,  however,  after  the  notice  was  given  me  to  stop  selling,  but  previous  to 
that  time.  The  first  witness  testified  to  having  bought  whiskey  for  medicinal 
purposes,  his  family  being  sick  at  the  time.  He  was  a  temperate  man,  and  a 
man  very  much  esteemed  in  the  town.  He  bought  it  for  medicinal  purposes 
and  so  stated  at  the  trial,  and  for  that  purpose  only ;  but  a  few  days  since  I 
was  informed  that  most  of  the  whiskey  was  still  in  his  house.  Another  witness 
was  our  town  clerk.  He  came  to  me  under  peculiar  circumstances.  I  might 
say  under  extraordinary  circumstances.  His  daughter  was  sick,  and  her 
attending  physician  ordered  him  to  procure  a  certain  kind  of  wine.  I  think 
it  was  Muscatel  or  Angelica,  a  California  wine.  He  went  to  the  town  agent 
to  procure  it,  but  the  town  agent  did  not  keep  it.  He  returned  home  suppos- 
ing that  he  must  send  to  Boston  for  it.  The  physician  came  in  the  morning  and 
inquired  if  he  had  obtained  the  wine  that  he  had  ordered  the  patient  to  take. 
He  replied  that  he  had  not,  because  they  did  not  keep  it  at  the  agency.  The 
doctor  said  that  his  daughter  must  have  it  and  have  it  immediately,  and  said 
that  he  wanted  him  to  go  over  to  Mr.  Bixby's  and  tell  him  that  if  he  had  that 
wine  he  must  let  him  have  it.  The  man  came  over  to  my  store,  and  told  me 
the  circumstances,  and  I  let  him  have  the  wine. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)     Did  this  lady  live  or  die  ? 

A.    She  died  a  day  or  two  after. 

Q.  It  was  then  an  urgent  case,  and  it  was  necessary  that  she  should  have 
it? 

A.  It  was  so  represented  to  me.  The  other  witness  was  a  jeweller  to 
whom  I  had  sold  alcohol  for  mechanical  purposes.  This  was  all  the  evidence 
that  was  produced,  and  was  the  evidence  upon  which  I  was  convicted  for 
violating  the  law. 

Q.    Were  you  fined  ? 

A.    I  was  fined  fifty  dollars  and  costs.      I  appealed  from  the  justice's 
decision.     The  case  did  not  go  to  trial.     My  counsel  carried  it  before  the 
judge  and  stated  the  evidence  to  him,  and  the  case  was  disposed  of  at  once  by 
111 


882  APPENDIX. 

paying  the  fine  which  the  State  provides,  and  which  the  judge  could  not,  of 
course,  remit. 

Q.  You  consider  it  necessary  as  a  part  of  the  apothecary  business  to  dis- 
pense wines  and  spirits,  and  that  it  is  hardly  possible  to  do  business  without 
doing  it  ? 

A .  I  do  consider  it  very  necessary  that  he  should  be  allowed  to  dispense, 
and  I  consider  that  it  is  right  and  proper  to  be  done. 

Q.     Why  were  you  not  appointed  agent  of  North  Bridgewater  ? 

A.    I  could  not  tell  you  that. 

Q.    Would  you  have  accepted  an  appointment  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MORSE.)     Why  not  ? 

A.  Because  I  consider  that,  as  the  business  was  required  to  be  conducted 
under  the  statute,  it  would  make  entirely  a  separate  business  from  keeping  an 
apothecary  store. 

Q.     Did  you  feel  that  it  would  injure  your  business  as  an  apothecary  ? 

A.  I  am  not  accustomed  to  do  business  in  the  way  required  by  the  law. 
It  would  involve  a  great  deal  of  difficulty  in  the  keeping  of  two  sets  of  books. 

Q.  As  an  apothecary,  have  you  any  feeling  of  this  kind, — that  you  ought 
not  to  be  obliged  to  apply  to  the  selectmen  for  liberty  to  carry  on  what  you 
consider  to  be  your  legitimate  business  ? 

A.     I  think  that  I  am  very  free  from  that  kind  of  feeling. 

Q.     Do  you  know  that  any  apothecaries  have  that  kind  of  feeling  ? 

A.    I  do  not. 

Q.     Is  there  any  apothecary  acting  as  agent  in  your  town  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.    Is  there  any  town  agent  there? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     What  is  his  business  ? 

A.  I  can  hardly  answer  that  question.  I  think,  however,  he  is  in  some 
kind  of  business  in  this  building  at  the  present  time.  Perhaps  a  clerk  in  some 
of  the  departments.  The  agency  has  generally  been  kept  in  some  shoe-shop, 
or  some  place  of  that  kind. 

Q.  Is  the  town  agent  of  your  town  competent  to  put  up  medical  prescrip- 
tions ? 

A.  I  should  hardly  think  that  he  was.  It  has  never  been  a  part  of  his 
business  at  all.  The  town  agent's  office  is  now  comparatively  central  to  what 
it  has  been,  although  it  is  still  much  further  from  the  centre  of  population 
than  most  places  of  business.  It  is  at  the  agent's  residence. 

Q.  Can  you  give  us  any  idea  of  the  profit  that  is  made  upon  wines  and 
spirits  sold  by  apothecaries  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  do  not  think  that  I  could. 

Q.    It  is  a  matter  of  profit  ? 

A.  I  think  not.  I  should  think  nothing  of  selling  them  in  that  point  of 
view. 

Q.  Do  you  know  what  class  of  persons  are  town  agents  in  the  towns  in 
your  neighborhood  ? 

A.    No,  sir ;  I  am  not  personally  acquainted  with  any  of  the  agents. 


APPENDIX.  883 

Q.     But  do  you  not  know  who  they  are  and  what  class  of  men  they  are  ?     , 

A.  I  do  not  now  remember  of  an  apothecary  in  our  vicinity  having  been 
appointed  as  agent. 

Q.  Do  you  know  whether  or  not  there  is  a  general  feeling  among  the 
apothecaries  against  acting  as  town  agents  ? 

A.  So  far  as  I  know,  they  do  object  to  acting  as  town  agents  under  the 
present  restrictions  of  the  law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  Are  there  any  other  apothecary  shops  in  your 
town  except  yours  ? 

A.    There  are. 

Q-     Did  any  of  yowc  profession  ever  apply  for  the  agency  ? 

A.    Not  that  I  know  of. 

Q.     Did  you  decline  to  take  it  ? 

A.  I  have  never  been  applied  to  to  take  it ;  but  I  should  decline  taking  it 
if  I  was. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  say  that  you  were  prosecuted  for  selling  a 
bottle  of  California  wine,  in  an  extraordinary  case  of  sickness  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir ;  I  have  stated  the  facts  in  regard  to  that  prosecution. 

Q.     Had  you  not  sold  other  wines  at  other  times  ? 

.A.     I  said  that  I  had.     I  said  that  I  had  bought  California  wines  previous 
to  that  time,  at  the  time  that  the  grocers  bought  Sambucci  wine. 

Q.     Have  you  sold  any  other  kind  of  spirituous  liquors  ? 

A.    I  had  sold  alcohol. 

Q.     Have  you  sold  brandy  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  that  I  shall  answer  that. 

Q.  Have  you  sold  any  liquors  except  for  medicinal  or  mechanical  pur- 
poses ? 

A.  No,  sir  ;  I  have  always  endeavored  to  conform  with  the  spirit  of  the 
law,  and  never  to  sell  except  for  medicinal  or  other  proper  purposes ;  and  in 
selling  have  always  used  what  discretion  I  could. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  it  conforming  to  the  spirit  of  the  law  to  sell  a  bottle 
of  wine  contrary  to  the  law  for  medicinal  purposes  ? 

A .  I  think  it  would  have  bceninorally  right  for  any  man  to  have  sold  it 
under  those  circumstances. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)     For  how  long  have  you  been  an  apothecary  ? 

A      For  fifteen  years. 

Q.  Are  you  willing  to  say  that  you  have  not  sold  intoxicating  liquor  a 
thousand  different  times  within  the  last  ten  years  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir,  I  am ;  unless  it  be  in  some  combined  form. 

Q.    I  ask  you  in  regard  to  intoxicating  liquor  uncombined. 

A.     No,  sir ;  I  have  not. 

Q.  Are  you  willing  now,  upon  your  honor  as  a  man,  to  say  that  you  have 
not  sold  intoxicating  liquor  a  thousand  times  within  the  last  ten  years  ? 

A.    I  say  at  once  that  I  do  not  think  I  have. 

TESTIMONY  OF  J.  L.  HUNT,  (continued.') 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  Before  you  were  town  agent,  you  were  an 
apothecary  in  Hingham,  and  had  been  for  many  years  ?  * 


884  APPENDIX. 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Before  you  were  town  agent  in  Hingliam,  were  you  ever  prosecuted 
for  selling  alcoholic  liquids  ? 

A.  Quite  a  number  of  years  ago,  we  were  prosecuted  upon  two  counts. 
One  was  that  we  sold  some  bay  rum  upon  the  prescription  of  Dr.  Fiske ;  the 
other  was  that  we  sold  directly  to  a  physician,  Dr.  Underwood  (he  so  testified 
in  court),  a  gill  of  alcohol.  He  testified  in  court  that  the  use  to  which  he  put 
it,  was  for  bathing  his  wife's  foot,  for  the  rheumatism  or  some  other  complaint. 
I  was  prosecuted.  One  sale  was  on-  the  written  prescription  of  a  physician, 
and  the  other  was,  as  I  have  stated,  a  sale  to  the  Doctor  himself. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  McCLELLAX.)     How  long  ago  was  that  ? 

A.     About  eighteen  years  ago ;  it  was  before  this  present  law. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)  You  stated  that  it  would  disturb  you  in  your 
preparations  of  other  medicines  to  sell  spirits  or  a  bottle  of  wine,  but  still  you 
sold  it? 

A.  I  will  state,  what  I  should  have  stated  before,  what  occurs  to  me  to  be 
the  greatest  objection  to  acting  as  town  agent  for  the  sale  of  liquor.  If  a 
person  calls  for  the  tincture  of  rhubarb,  I  know  that  I  can  go  right  along  and 
put  it  up ;  but  if  the  call  is  for  a  pint  of  rum,  there  are  some  questions  that 
must  be  asked  before  I  can  sell  it.  I  must  know  who  the  man  is,  and  what 
he  wants  the  rum  for,  and  must  be  satisfied  that  he  wants  it  for  medicinal 
purposes,  before  I  can  sell  it;  and  such  inquiries  I  think  are  out  of  place  in 
an  apothecary  shop. 

Q.  If  you  are  an  apothecary,  and  have  the  right  to  sell  for  medicinal 
purposes,  do  you  not  have  to  go  through  the  same  investigation  ? 

A.  Perhaps  to  some  extent  an  investigation  would  be  required,  but  still, 
it  being  my  own  business,  I  would  be  more  at  liberty  in  the  matter. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  Do  I  understand  that  you  came  here  as  a  witness 
entirely  independent  of  the  cause  of  license  or  prohibition,  and  simply  in  the 
interest  of  your  professional  business  ? 

A.  I  came  here  in  obedience  to  a  summons  from  the  Chairman  of  the  Com- 
mittee, not  knowing  what  questions  would  be  asked  me. 

Q.  Since  you  came  here,  have  you  bean  in  communication  with  the  coun- 
sel upon  either  side  ? 

A.    1  have  not. 

Q.  How  does  it  happen  that  the  details  of  your  experience  are  known  to 
the  counsel  upon  one  side  ? 

A.    I  suppose  that  I  have  mentioned  what  I  have  said  to  some  friends. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  SPOOXER.)     Do  you  sell  opium  ? 

A.    I  do. 

Q.     Do  you  sell  arsenic  ? 

A.    I  do  once  in  a  while. 

Q.    Have  you  not  several  articles  in  your  shop  that  are  termed  poison  ? 

A.    I  have. 

Q.     Do  you  always  make  a  record  of  what  you  sell  ? 

A .     I  do  of  those  articles  enumerated  in  the  statute. 

Q.     Does  making  that  record  disturb  you  very  much  ? 

A.     No,  sir  ;  it  is  in  my  line  of  business. 


APPENDIX.  885 

TESTIMONY  OF  SAMPSON  REED. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)  You  have  been  a  retail  apothecary  and  whole- 
sale druggist  in  the  city  of  Boston  for  many  years  ? 

A.    I  have. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  MORSE.)     How  many  years  ? 

A.  As  retail  seller  from  1824,  about  seven  or  eight  years,  and  as  a  whole- 
sale druggist  from  that  time  to  1860. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)  You  know  the  character  of  the  apothecaries  in 
the  city  as  well  as  in  the  country.  Should  you  judge  that  the  apothecaries' 
business  could  be  properly  prosecuted  under  this  law  ? 

A.    I  should  not  suppose  it  could  be. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  I  should  like  to  inquire  whether  there  is  any  diffi- 
culty in  your  opinion,  and  if  so,  what  it  is,  in  apothecaries  becoming  town 
agents,  and  doing  that  part  of  the  business  which  requires  them  to  sell  wines 
and  spirits  ? 

A.  I  should  suppose  that  the  two  things  were  quite  incompatible  with 
each  other.  I  should  think  it  would  certainly  be  so  in  the  city  of  Boston,  and 
J  should  suppose  it  would  be  so  in  the  country.  I  would  state  that  for  many 
years  after  I  was  in  business  as  an  apothecary,  it  was  most  an  unknown  thing 
for  apothecaries  to  be  called  upon  for  spirits  of  any  kind  ;  but  when  the  tem- 
perance movement  began,  a  change  took  place ;  spirits  and  wines  seemed  to 
be  associated  in  the  minds  of  the  pubjic,  especially  in  the  minds  of  temper- 
ance men,  with  medicines,  and  the  apothecaries  and  druggists  began  to  be 
called  upon  for  that  class  of  articles  ;  and  I  think  it  has  continued  so  since. 
It  has  always  seemed  to  me  that  the  fact  which  led  to  this  call  on  the  apothe- 
caries and  druggists  for  this  class  of  articles,  originated  in  the  temperance 
movement.  I  think  if  they  could  be  permitted  to  supply  this  call,  it  would 
promote  the  movement.  It  is  calculated  to  associate  this  article  in  the  minds 
of  the  public  with  medicine. 

Q.  Do  you  regard  it  as  adding  strongly  to  the  prohibitory  law  to  allow 
apothecaries  to  sell  wines  and  spirits  ? 

A.  I  should  think  it  would  help  the  cause  of  temperance  if  they  should  sell 
it ;  that  is,  there  should  be  suitable  apothecaries,  of  course.  There  should  be 
some  way  to  determine  that  they  are  competent  for  the  position. 

Q.  If  they  were  to  be  qualified  for  this  duty  without  anything  else,  it 
would  be  sufficient  you  would  think  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  If  the  apothecaries  could  be  licensed,  what 
would  you  have  them  licensed  for  ? 

A .     For  the  purposes  that  are  prescribed  in  the  law. 

Q.  I  mean  laying  aside  that  for  a  moment ;  what  should  you  think  the 
proper  uses  to  be  for  which  they  should  be  authorized  to  sell, — medicine  or 
anything  ? 

A.  I  see  no  reason  why  they  should  not  be  licensed  to  sell  for  medicinal 
and  mechanical  and  manufacturing  purposes. 

Q.    You  would  not  have  them  authorized  to  sell  as  a  beverage  ? 

A.     Oh  no,  sir. 


886  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Under  the  present  law,  they  are  authorized  to  sell  for  medicinal, 
mechanical,  and  manufacturing  purposes ;  now  is  there  anything  to  make  that 
business  any  more  difficult  to  be  qualified  for  than  the  general  business  of  the 
apothecary  ? 

A.  I  think  that  this  law  is  very  perplexing,  requiring  what  cannot  be 
kept.  It  would  interfere,  I  should  suppose,  with  the  business  of  the  apoth- 
ecary. 

Q.    Is  there  anything  that  renders  it  more  s©  under  this  law  than  another  ? 

A.  I  do  not  think  that  there  is.  It  would  be  restricting  the  apothecary  to 
purchase  of  the  general  agent  or  the  Commissioner.  I  think  people  generally 
desire  to  purchase  where  they  can  get  it  the  cheapest.  With  the  agent 
himself  it  is  no  inducement  to  buy  the  article  cheap. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  You  say  that  until  the  passage  of  this  law,  it  was 
not  customary  for  apothecaries  to  be  called  upon  to  furnish  liquors  so  much. 
Is  it  not  from  the  fact  that  they  have  been  appointed  as  town  agent  in  some 
cases  ? 

A.  I  think,  since  the  law  was  passed,  that  the  people  have  begun  to  regard 
it  in  the  light  of  a  medicine,  and  have  naturally  looked  to  the  apothecary. 

TESTIMONY  OF  FRANK  W.  SIMMONS. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)     You  are  an  apothecary  on  Washington  Street  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  in  the  business  ? 

A.     About  twelve  years. 

Q.     I  believe  you  are  a  temperance  man,  are  you  not  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  belong  to  the  Sons  of  Temperance  and  to  other  societies  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  Being  in  the  legitimate  line  of  an  apothecary's  business,  do  you  feel 
obliged  to  dispense  wines  and  spirits  in  putting  up  physicians'  prescriptions  ? 
Is  the  nature  of  your  business  such  as  to  require  you  to  do  it  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  have  any  compunctions  about  it  ? 

A .     No,  sir. 

Q.  Do  you  feel  that  you  can  do  your  busiaess  properly,  and  attend  to  the 
wants  of  your  business  unless  you  do  dispense  these  articles  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.  Would  you  be  willing  to  accept  a  local  agency  for  the  sale  of  wines 
and  spirits  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    What  would  be  your  reasons  for  not  accepting  ? 

A.  The  only  reason  would  be  that  it  would,  in  my  opinion,  have  to  be 
conducted  in  the  form  of  another  business.  I  should  have  to  make  a  separate 
business  of  it. 

Q.  Should  you  have  to  keep  a  separate  set  of  books?  And  would  it 
interfere  with  your  regular  business  ? 

A.     I  should  object  to  it  on  that  account. 

Q.    You  would  as  soon  mix  it  up  with  the  grocery  business  V 


APPENDIX.  887 

A.     I  think  I  should. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  ALDRICU.)     What  do  you  furnish  alcoholic  preparations  for  ? 

A.     Strictly  officinal  purposes. 

Q.    Nothing  else  ? 

A.     No,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)  Do  you  sell  alcoholic  preparations  to  those  who 
)all  for  them  ? 

A.  I  furnish  them,  always,  however,  asking  the  question  if  they  are  to  be 
Tlsed  for  medicinal  purposes. 

Q.     Do  you  sell  it  when  they  answer  in  the  negative  ? 

A.  Sometimes  when  they  have  answered  in  the  negative,  I  have  sold  it, 
when  I  have  known  the  parties. 

Q.    If  it  is  not  for  chemical  and  mechanical  purposes  you  hesitate  ? 

A.  I  have  sold  it,  but  I  should  use  my  discretion  whether  I  should  take  a 
man's  word  or  not. 

Q.  You  would  exercise  your  discretion  in  any  case  whether  it  was  for 
medicinal,  mechanical  or  chemical  purposes  ?  You  furnish  it  for  all  these 
cases,  do  you  not  ? 

A.    I  do,  but  under  restrictions. 

Q.     Then  you  do  not  sell  to  everybody  ? 

A.    No,  sir. 

Q.    If  you  were  appointed  an  agent,  why  should  you  not  accept  ? 

A.  If  I  were  appointed  an  agent,  I  should  think  it  would  interfere  with 
my  business  ;  and  that  it  would  take  so  much  attention  from  my  legitimate 
business  that  I  could  not  attend  to  it. 

Q.  Would  mechanics  and  other  classes  of  people  come  to  you  any  more 
than  now,  since  you  furnish  liquors  for  these  same  purposes  ? 

A.  If  I  were  to  take  an  agency,  I  should  think  that  it  would  be  taken  for 
granted  by  them  that  I  was  to  furnish  them. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  Is  there  any  greater  embarrassment  more  than 
now,  except  that  you  would  have  to  keep  two  sets  of  accounts  ? 

A.    I  do  not  know  from  practice,  but  it  is  my  opinion  that  there  would  be. 

Q.    You  feel  that  it  is  contrary  to  the  law  at  present  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.  How  can  you,  as  a  good  citizen,  justify  yourself  in  a  sale  which  you 
and  the  temperance  men  believe  to  be  wrong  ? 

A.  Under  the  present  law,  I  cannot  justify  it.  I  only  do  it,  as  I  said 
before,  for  necessary  purposes  and  necessary  wants. 

Q.    But  that  is  a  violation  of  the  law  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir;  I  stand  liable  at  any  time. 

Q.  How  can  you  justify  yourself  in  carrying  on  this  business  in  defiance  of 
the  law  of  the  land,  when  by  taking  an  agency  you  can  carry  it  on  ? 

A.    I  cannot  answer  that  question. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONEB.)  Supposing  there  was  a  sub-agent  at  the  next 
door,  how  would  that  affect  you  ? 

A.  It  would  be  according  to  whether  they  were  to  sell  for  mechanical  or 
medicinal  purposes,  I  should  think. 


888  APPENDIX. 

Q.  Suppose  you  should  ask  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen  to  appoint  an  agent, 
if  you  do  not  wish  to  take  it  yourself? 

A.     The  apothecaries  do  wish  to  take  it,  so  far  as  medicinal  purposes  go. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  In  your  own  regular  apothecary's  business,  you 
wish  to  do  your  own  business  of  buying  and  selling  as  you  please  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q,  Is  there  any  inconvenience  connected  with  this  business  of  the  agency 
in  which  you  cannot  buy  and  where  you  cannot  sell  as  you  please,  being  an 
agent  in  a  business,  and  looking  to  the  profits  of  your  own  business, — is  there 
that  in  it  that  any  business  man  would*  object  to,  and  all  business  men,  if  con- 
nected with  the  business  which  he  is  in  at  the  time  ? 

A.    I  hardly  understand  that  statement  so  as  to  answer  it. 

Q.    Would  you  connect  selling  on  commission  with  other  business  ? 

A.  So  far  as  profits  go,  in  that  part  of  the  business,  I  think  I  had  just  as 
lief,  so  far  as  I  am  concerned  myself;  I  do  not  know  how  it  is  with  other  parties. 

TESTIMONY  OF  ISAAC  T.  CAMPBELL. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)     Where  is  your  place  of  business  ? 

A.  My  place  of  business  is  in  State  Street.  My  store  is  No.  153  Broad- 
way, South  Boston. 

Q.     You  are  drug  examiner  for  the  port  of  Boston  ? 

A.    I  am,  sir. 

Q'    You  have  been  local  agent  ? 

A.    I  have. 

Q.     And  you  are  an  apothecary  in  South  Boston  ? 

A.  Yes,  sir.  Perhaps  I  should  qualify  my  statement  by  saying,  that  the 
Mayor  and  Aldermen  saw  fit  to  honor  me  with  the  appointment  which,  how- 
ever, I  did  not  accept. 

Q.     You  have  never  acted  under  it  ? 

A.     I  have  never  acted  under  it. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  an  apothecary,  if  he  was  a  first-class  apothecary, 
could  conscientiously  act  under  that  agency  as  a  local  agency,  and  be  obliged 
to  perform  his  business  as  an  apothecary,  as  a  first-class  scientific  man  ? 

A .     I  do  not. 

Q.     It  is  your  judgment  that  he  could  not  do  it  ? 

A.     I  could  not. 

Q.     Could  he  furnish  himself  with  any  articles  that  he  would  want  ? 

A .  No,  sir ;  the  only  reason  why  I  did  not  accept  it  was  because  I  imported 
my  own  wines  and  brandies. 

Q.  Do  you  consider  an  analysis  of  wines  and  spirits,  especially  as  it  is 
guaranteed  to  be  pure  from  the  State  Agency,  is  sufficient  guaranty  to  you  or 
the  public  for  furnishing  them  as  medicine  to  your  customers  ? 

A.     Of  a  great  many  liquors  it  might  not. 

Q.  Would  it  be  a  sufficient  guaranty  if  it  were  furnished  on  the  certificate 
of  the  assayer  ? 

A .    I  should  take  the  certificate  of  the  very  best  chemists. 


APPENDIX.  889 

Q.  Do  you  consider  that  the  chemist's  certificate  will  give  you  the  age  and 
flavors  of  the  wines,  and  will  give  you  the  qualities  of  the  wines,  including 
all  the  circumstances  connected  with  them  ? 

A.    It  cannot,  sir.  . 

Q.     You  have  a  great  many  analyses  in  your  regular  business  ? 

A.    I  do,  as  drug-examiner. 

Q.  The  analysis  applied  to  wine  worth  two  dollars  would  not  apply  to 
wine  worth  eight  dollars  ? 

A.    It  would  not  be  the  same. 

Q.  Is  it  your  judgment  that  in  the  examination  of  spirits,  the  certificate 
of  the  State  Assayer  will  give  you  the  amount  of  fusel  oil  ? 

A.  I  understand  that  it  does  not.  I  understand  that  he  gives  you  an 
analysis  showing  if  there  are  foreign  substances. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MINER.)  I  understand  you  to  say  that  he  cannot  determino 
the  amount  of  spirit  and  of  sugar  ? 

A.     He  can  determine  that. 

Q.     Did  you  not  say  that  his  certificate  was  sufficient  ? 

A.    I  did. 

Q.     Why  do  you  think  that  it  is  not  sufficient  for  your  purposes  ? 

A.    It  proves  the  fact  of  the  purity  of  the  wine,  but  not  the  richness. 

Q.  Does  the  richness  depend  on  the  amount  of  the  spirit  and  sugar,  and 
the  maturity  of  the  wine,  with  the  flavor  imparted  partly  by  age  and  partly 
influenced  by  the  circumstances  under  which  it  has  been  kept,  and  cannot  the 
chemist  determine  that  ? 

A.    He  cannot. 

Q.     Which  of  them  can  he  not  determine  ? 

A.     He  cannot  determine  the  age. 

Q.     Can  he  determine  the  maturity  ? 

A.     I  think  it  would  be  difficult. 

Q.  Are  you  not  aware  that  they  are  obtained  by  other  circumstances  than 
the  combination  of  the  elements  from  which  they  are  prepared  ? 

A.    I  am. 

Q.    Is  the  testimony  of  a  chemist  with  regard  to  maturity  competent  ? 

A.    I  think  not,  generally,  among  wine  manufacturers. 

Q.  Do  you  yourself  know  to  the  contrary?  Have  you  any  personal 
knowledge  ? 

A.    Only  by  taste. 

TESTIMONY  OF  THOMAS  HOLLIS. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)    You  are  a  druggist  and  apothecary  in  Boston  ? 
A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.     How  long  have  you  been  in  Boston  ? 

A.    I  have  been  in  business  now — this  will  make  the  fiftieth  year. 
Q.     When  you  were  first  in  the  business  there  was  very  little  spirits  sold  ? 
A.     We  sold  none. 

Q.     Then  the  business  has  grown  up  of  late  ? 
A.    It  has  grown  up  within  a  dozen  years. 
112 


890  APPENDIX. 

Q.  How  do  you  account  for  the  sale  getting  into  the  apothecaries'  hands 
so  much  ? 

A.  Perhaps  in  the  first  place  it  was  on  account  of  prohibitory  law  that 
there  was  a  general  feeling  that  it  better  be  placed  amgng  medicines  instead 
of  being  in  the  hands  of  other  parties. 

Q.  You  mean  that  the  temperance  men  made  that  law,  and  it  became 
unfashionable  to  use  it,  and  it  naturally  went  to  the  apothecaries  ? 

A.     They  would  rather  prefer  to  have  it  in  the  hands  of  the  apothecaries. 

Q.  You  think  it  would  be  better  to  have  it  in  such  hands  than  to  have  it 
in  use  ? 

A.  Mainly  for  medicinal  purposes;  not  for  beverages:  that  was  one 
reason.  Then  I  think  physicians  have  been  in  the  habit  of  prescribing  within 
the  last  ten  years  tenfold  more  than  they  did  before. 

Q.     How  do  you  account  for  that  ? 

A.     The  idea  is  that  diseases  change  in  their  peculiarities. 

Q.     Is  the  idea  that  there  is  more  need  now  than  formerly  ? 

A.  I  do  not  know  about  that.  It  is  a  general  impression,  and  late  years 
there  has  been  a  change  in  practice.  So  it  is  with  other  medicines.  There 
are  some  articles  that  we  do  not  sell  at  alL  Take  for  instance  calomel,  there 
is  not  one  pound  used  now  where  there  was  ten  formerly.  For  ten  years  I 
never  sold  the  article  of  brandy  ;  but  I  was  obliged  to  dispense  that  and  to 
sell  it  because  physicians  prescribed  it.  There  are  persons — I  was  going  to 
say  scarcely  any  person  will  take  a  voyage  without  taking  spirit  of  some 
kind.  On  board  ships,  I  always  put  up  brandy  in  medicine  chests.  I  scarcely 
ever  put  up  any  without  putting  a  small  quantity ;  and  I  have  put  up  a  great 
deal  of  medicine  for  ministers,  missionaries  who  have  gone  to  foreign  countries. 
And  I  have  invariably  kept  this  article  during  the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years.  I 
think  this  change  began  fifteen  years  ago,  and  has  been  gradually  increasing. 

Q.  Do  you  think  that  the  apothecary  can  properly  perform  the  duties  of 
his  business  without  dispensing  wines  and  liquors  as  medicines,  and  comply 
with  the  law  ? 

A.  I  do  not  see  how  he  can  comply  with  it  according  to  the  present 
practice  of  physicians.  The  physicians  havo  done  most  of  our  selling. 

Q.  The  question  has  come  up  here,  whether  an  apothecary  could  accept 
a  sub-agency,  under  the  existing  law.  Do  you  think  an  apothecary  could 
properly  perform  his  duties  as  an  apothecary  and  accept  an  agency  for  the 
sale  of  liquors  under  the  present  law  ? 

A.  I  can  perhaps  answer  that  question,  by  telling  you  what  I  did  myself. 
Soon  after  the  Maine  Law  was  passed,  the  Mayor  and  Aldermen  had  liberty 
to  authorize  persons  to  sell ;  and  persons  might  apply  it  for  medicinal,  chem- 
ical and  mechanical  purposes.  And  under  that  regulation,  I  applied  to  the 
Mayor  and  Aldermen  for  a  license,  although  I  did  not  sell  but  very  little.  I 
only  felt  that  I  wanted  to  comply  with  the  law  ;  and  I  applied,  and  got  a 
license  without  difficulty.  They  directed  me  to  make  a  record  of  all  sales 
that  I  made,  and  to  keep  a  book  for  the  record,  the  same  as  in  any  business. 
I  took  the  license  in  good  faith.  I  commenced  and  purchased  what  articles 
I  wanted  as  a  State  agency,  and  made  a  record.  Some  six  months  after  I 
was  licensed  by  the  city  of  Boston,  I  received  a  notice  that  it  was  not  neces- 


APPENDIX.  891 

sary  for  me  to  make  any  returns  to  the  Board,  and  that  I  might  discontinue 
the  record.  I  still  held  a  license,  and  found  it  quite  a  relief;  for  it  was  not  a 
very  comfortable  thing  to  be  obliged  to  keep  a  book  for  separate  sales.  And 
then  all  that  I  purchased,  I  was  obliged  to  use  that  in  all  the  tinctures ;  and 
I  was  not  allowed  to  furnish  for  anybody.  I  gave  up  the  keeping  of  this 
record,  by  the  direction  of  the  Board.  I  took  a  license  for  the  next  year ; 
and  the  next  year  after  that  it  seemed  to  have  died 'out,  and  the  sale  of  spirits 
became  a  free  thing.  There  was  no  let  nor  license  anywhere  ;  and  it  was  not 
thought  that  there  should  be  any  applications.  With  regard  to  the  agency,  it 
is  only  a  commission  on  borrowed  goods.  It  is  an  incumbrance  to  the  apoth- 
ecary to  have  it,  because  he  cannot,  as  in  the  case  of  the  agent  from  Hingham, 
have  the  whole  sale.  He  is  one  of  a  hundred  dealers  ;  and  he  is  obliged  to 
scrutinize  every  one  that  comes  to  him ;  and  he  has  very  small  pay. 

Q.    You  think  that  generally  the  apothecaries  would  not  like  to  accept  ? 

A.    It  does  not  yet  appear  desirable. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MORSE.)  You  are  President  of  the  Massachusetts  College  of 
Pharmacy  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  A  VERY.)  I  would  ask  you  whether,  as  a  conscientious  and 
intelligent  apothecary,  as  you  are,  you  would  not  deem  it  your  duty,  even  if 
there  were  no  law,  if  any  party  should  come  to  you,  and  inquire  for  liquor,  to 
inquire  into  it  ? 

A.     I  should,  sir;  I  always  have. 

Q.     If  there  were  never  any  law  you  would  do  that  ? 
* A .     I  should  always  do  it. 

Q.  I  asked  the  question  as  relative  to  the  question  as  to  its  being  an  inter- 
ference with  the  regular  business  of  the  apothecary,  to  take  an  agency, 
because  it  required  him  to  scrutinize  those  to  whom  he  sold. 

A.  It  would  require  the  keeping  of  separate  books,  and  the  apothecary 
would  constantly  have  his  attention  distracted. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  SPOONER.)  Have  the  State  authority  to  give  any  compen- 
sation that  they  deem  proper  ? 

A.     I  do  not  knew  how  that  is  now. 

Mr.  Baker  was  recalled  by  the  counsel  for  the  petitioners,  and  testified 
briefly. 

TESTIMONY  OF  JOHN  I.  BAKER  (continued.') 

Q.  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  How  long  since  you  appointed  an  agent  in  the  city 
of  Boston  ? 

A.    In  the  month  of  January  last. 

Q.     Does  he  give  bonds  to  the  city  of  Boston  ? 

A.     He  gives  bonds  to  me,  sir. 

Q.    I  wish  to  know  if  he  buys  his  liquor  of  you  as  the  other  agents  do  ? 

A.  He  buys  not  exactly  as  other  agents  do;  he  buys  directly  from  my 
stock.  The  account  is  kept  by  me. 

Q.  Is  his  transaction,  his  purchasing  of  liquors,  the  same  as  that  of  the 
town  agent  ? 


892  APPENDIX. 

A.  Not  exactly ;  because  he  sells,  and  comes  and  takes  the  liquors  directly 
from  me. 

Q.     And  it  is  charged  to  him  ? 

A.    It  is  charged  to  him  in  small  quantities. 

Q.  Where  do  you  get  your  whiskeys  ?  You  spoke  of  getting  your  Med- 
ford  mm  and  alcohol  of  manufacturers,  and  your  foreign  liquors  of  Foster 
&  Taylor.  Do  you  go  to  this  same  house  for  your  whiskey  ? 

A.     To  Foster  &  Taylor. 

Q.    It  is  American  whiskey  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     They  are  not  manufacturers  ? 

A.  They  are  not  manufacturers,  sir.  I  would  state  my  reason,  if  you  will 
allow  me.  There  are  no  manufacturers  here  that  I  know  of.  I  suppose  that 
the  law  is  a  practical  measure.  It  simply  authorizes  me  to  buy  and  sell.  I 
could  not  have  it  from  Ohio  and  Kentucky,  where  it  is  manufactured,  and 
have  it  analyzed.  I  must  buy  under  these  circumstances.  When  I  went  to 
this  firm,  I  asked  them  if  they  were  ready  to  sell  under  the  provisions  of  the 
Act.  They  said  that  they  had  consulted  eminent  counsel,  and  that  they  were 
instructed  that  they  had  a  right  to  sell.  Under  that  state  of  facts,  I  purchased 
of  them. 

Q.  You  buy  without  having  determined  the  question  whether  it  is  right 
to  sell? 

A.    It  is  not  for  me  to  determine. 

Q.  Do  they  have  an  arrangement  with  any  particular  house  of  which  they 
get  whiskey  ?  Does  it  all  come  from  one  place  ? 

A.  Not  all  from  one  place;  different  kinds  are  from  different  manufac- 
turers. Some  is  very  high  in  price,  and  other  kinds  are  very  different 
according  to  age. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  FAY.)  It  was  stated  in  some  of  the  other  hearings  that  you 
sold  different  qualities  of  brandies  ? 

A.  I  do,  but  not  American  brandies.  As  for  selling  any  American 
brandies,  I  have  not  had  them,  and  I  have  no  brandies  less  than  seven  dollars 
per  gallon. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  CHILD.)     You  buy  in  the  original  package  ? 

A.    Yes,  sir. 

Q.  And  all  the  American  liquors  that  you  buy,  you  buy  of  the  manu- 
facturers ? 

A.     Yes,  sir,  so  far  as  I  can. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  MIXER.)  I  understand  it  that  nobody  can  legally  sell  foreign 
liquors  here  under  the  present  law,  unless  you  buy  them  in  the  original  pack- 
ages ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     The  question  is  if  you  can  buy  it  ? 

A.  I  think  the  statute  contains  no  provision  against  buying  under  the 
circumstances  in  which  we  are  placed. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  FAY.)     Are  there  apothecaries  who  are  town  agents  ? 

A.  Yes,  a  large  number.  I  think  that  all  in  Worcester  are  agents,  and 
there  are  quite  a  number  throughout  the  State.  There  are  also  quite  a  num- 


APPENDIX.  893 

ber  at  the  present  time  who  are  making  applications  to  be  appointed  agents 
in  this  city. 

Q.     (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)     Can  you  name  one  ? 

A.  There  is  an  apothecary  in  East  Boston  who  has  made  an  application 
for  an  agency.  I  have  laid  these  applications  on  file,  because  I  have  not  con- 
cluded to  appoint.  They  can  be  seen  at  my  place  of  business. 

Q,  (By  Mr.  CHILD.)  Do  you  buy  any  other  domestic  liquors  except 
whiskey  of  anybody  else  except  the  manufacturers  in  less  quantities  than 
thirty  gallons  ? 

A.     I  do  not  intend  to. 

Q.     Do  you  purchase  in  larger  quantities  ? 

A.  In  one  instance  I  bought  of  another  party  than  the  manufacturer.  The 
agent  in  New  Bedford  called  my  attention  to  some  new  rum  which  could  be 
bought  for  less  than  the  market  value,  and  stated  that  he  wanted  it  for  his 
uses  ;  and  I  bought  it.  That  is  the  only  case  that  I  remember  of. 

Q.     Do  you  buy  in  the  original  packages  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Any  American  gin  that  you  buy  ? 

A.     Yes,  sir. 

Q.     Do  you  buy  of  the  manufacturers  ? 

A.     They  purport  to  be  the  manufacturers ;  I  cannot  say  that  they  are. 

Q.     Have  they  got  a  manufactory  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  it. 

Q.     What  quantities  do  you  buy  ? 

.A.     In  packages  of  about  forty  gallons. 

Q.     What  other  American  liquors  do  you  buy  ? 

A.     Nothing  else  occurs  to  me  now,  except  as  I  have  testified  before. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ALDRICH.)  I  would  inquire  whether  it  is  your  understanding 
that  the  agents  whom  you  appoint  here  have  a  right  to  sell  to  anybody  except 
citizens  of  the  city  of  Boston  ? 

A.     I  do  not  know  of  any  limitation  of  the  law  forbidding  them. 

Q.  The  statute  provides  as  follows :  "  He  shall  appoint  in  the  city  of  Bos- 
ton as  many  agents,  not  exceeding  five,  as  he  thinks  the  interests  of  the 
citizens  require." 

A.  The  law  has  been  so  acted  upon,  as  I  know  in  other  towns,  as  to  sell  to 
parties  not  of  the  town. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  COLCORD.)  Do  you  rely  solely  upon  analysis  for  the  wines 
and  spirits  that  you  purchase  ? 

A.  No.  I  rely  upon  the  character  of  the  men  of  whom  I  purchase,  as 
well  as  upon  analysis.  I  buy,  for  instance,  a  large  quantity  of  Foster  & 
Taylor.  And  I  understand  that  druggists  in  this  city  buy  largely  of  them 
also. 

Q.  I  would  inquire  whether  the  liquor  that  is  furnished  you  from  that  store 
is  furnished  solely  on  the  guarantee  of  your  chemist's  certificate,  or  whether 
you  use  your  own  sense  to  determine  the  quality  ? 

A.  I  have  but  littlo  confidence  in  the  test  of  liquors  in  this  respect,  having 
seen  as  many  professed  experts  deceived.  I  have  seen  old  dealers  years  ago 


894  APPENDIX. 

choose  American  brandy  made  at  $0.40,  in  preference  to  that  imported  at 
$2.50. 

Q.  How  do  you  determine  the  age  of  wines  ?  Do  you  rely  solely  on  the 
analysis  to  give  you  these  properties  ? 

A.  Not  at  all.  I  regard  the  analysis,  and  the  confidence  I  have  in  the 
parties  who  sell. 

Q.    You  do  not  rely  on  your  own  judgment  ? 

A.  I  do  not  pretend  to  have  any  judgment,  or,  at  least,  to  be  an  expert. 
I  say,  as  I  did  the  other  day,  that  I  have  got  to  purchase  somewhere,  and  that 
I  purchase  of  those  parties  in  whom  I  have  the  most  confidence. 

Q.  (By  Mr.  ANDREW.)  You  said  you  had  your  attention  called  to  a 
quantity  of  New  England  rum  very  cheap.  How  cheap  was  it  ? 

A.  I  did  not  say  it  was  very  cheap  ;  it  was  under  the  market  price.  I 
think  it  was  $2.10,  when  the  market  price  for  Lawrence's  rum  was  $2.50. 

Q.  How  much  do  you  give  per  gallon  generally  for  American  manufactured 
spirits  ? 

A.    I  give  $2.50  at  the  present  time  for  new  rum. 

Q.     Do  you  purchase  any  whiskey  less  than  $2  ? 

A.  Nothing  less  than  $2.75.  The  $1.50  whiskey  of  which  these  gentlemen 
speak  they  probably  know  more  about  than  I  do. 

Adjourned. 


[The  following  communication,  inserted  at  the  request  of  the  counsel  for 
the  Petitioners,  will  explain  itself.] 

APRIL  1, 1867. 
lion.  ROBERT  SI.  MORSE,  JR.,  Chairman,  cfc.,  <fc.,  <fc. 

MY  DEAR  SIR  : — In  revising  my  memoranda,  in  the  preparation  of  my  Argument,  I 
find  that  I  probably  made  the  error  of  confounding  Dr.  Dalton,  with  Dr.  Gairdner  of 
Edinburgh,  in  my  cross-examination  of  Dr.  Bellows.  Not  having  the  books  before  me, 
and  not  being  a  man  of  science  (although  I  had  examined  Dr.  Dalton  partially),  I  confused 
two  separate  recollections.  Will  you  be  kind  enough  to  allow  this  note,  or  its  substance, 
to  be  inserted  in  the  proper  place,  by  the  Reporter,  as  a  note,  and  thus  correct  an  inadver- 
tence. Dr.  Dalton  does  not  appear  to  discuss  "  alcohol,"  in  the  edition  of  his  very  able 
work  at  my  command. 

I  am,  very  respectfully  and  obediently,  &c.,  &c.,  &c., 

JOHN  A.  ANDREW 


APPENDIX.  895 


WITNESSES. 


FOR  PETITIONERS. 

Page. 

Adams,  John  Quincy,  Quincy, 302 

Adams,  Rev.  Nehemiah,  D.  D.,  Boston, 165 

Agassiz,  Prof.  Louis,  Cambridge, 280 

Alger,  Rev.  William  R.,  Boston, Ill 

Andrews,  Joseph,  Boston, .        .        .•  261 

Bacon,  Rev.  Leonard,  D.  D.,  New  Haven,  Ct., 356 

Barnard,  Rev.  Charles  F.,  West  Roxbury, 226 

Bigelow,  George  F.,  M.  D.,  Boston, 117 

Bigelow,  Prof.  Henry  J.,  M.  D.,  Boston,      .        .        . 405 

Bishop,  Hon.  Henry  W.,  Lenox, .        .        .        .    • 59 

Blagden,  Rev.  George  W.,  D.  D.,  Boston, 113 

Blaisdell,  Hon.  J.  C.,  Fall  River, 367 

Bolles,  Rev.  J.  A.,  D.  D.,  Boston,        .        . .       .102 

Bowen,  Prof.  Francis,  Cambridge, 314 

Brady,  Rev.  Robert,  Boston, .  102 

Brewster,  Augustus  O.,  Boston, 86 

Brownell,  Hon.  Oliver  M.,  New  Bedford,     .        . 336 

Buffington,  Hon.  Edward  R.,  Fall  River, 338 

Burrell,  Brig-Gen.  Isaac  S.,  Roxbury, 249 

Clark,  Rev.  B.  F.,  Chelmsford,     .  321,  325 

Clarke,  Prof.  Edward  H.,  M.  D.,  Boston, 384,400,413 

Clifford,  Ex.-Gov.  John  H.,  New  Bedford, 31 

Cluer,  John  C.,  Boston, 214 

Davis,  Hon.  Charles  G.,  Plymouth,     .                340 

Derby,  E.  H.,  Esq.,  Boston, 205 

Derby,  George,  M.  D.,  Boston,     .        .        .        . 412 

Doherty,  Rev.  Manassas,  Cambridge, 105 

Duncan,  Hon.  James  H.,  Haverhill, 328 

Eastburn,  Right  Rev.  Manton,  D.  D.,  Boston, 269 

Edson,  Frank.  Hadley, "...  332 

Edson,  Rev.  Theodore,  D.  D.,  Lowell, 318 

Ellis,  Rev.  George  E.,  D.  D.,  Charlestown, 276 

Ellis,  Rev.  Rufus,  Boston, 312 

Fassin,  Matthew  J.,  New  York, 415 

Fay,  Hon.  Francis  B.,  Lancaster, 299 

French,  Hon.  Henry  F.,  Cambridge, 170 

Gaffield,  Thomas,  Boston, 219 

Gage,  Addison,  West  Cambridge, 254 

Gillette,  Hon.  E.  B.,  Westfield, 63,  71 

Goodwin,  Albert  G.,  Boston, .        •        •        •        .123 

Hardy,  Hon.  Alpheus,  Boston, 199 

Harris,  Hon.  Benjamin  W.,  East  Bridgewater, •  .        .  67 


896  APPENDIX. 

Page. 

Hartney,  Rev.  Michael,  Salem, 126 

Haskins,  Rev.  George  F.,  Boston, t     .        .        .29 

Healjr,  Rev.  James  A.,  Boston, 19 

Hedge,  Rev.  Frederic  H.,  D.  D.,  Brookline, 306 

Hill,  Henry,  Braintree, 303 

Hillard,  Hon.  George  S.,  Boston, 50 

Holmes,  Prof.  Oliver  Wendell,  M.  D.,  Boston, 401 

Horsford,  Prof.  E.  1ST.,  Cambridge, 402 

Hoyt,  Capt.  David,  Deerfield, 381 

Ide,  Rev.  George  B.,  D.  D.,  Springfield,      ...        .        '. 353 

Jackson,  Charles  T.,  M.  D.,  Boston, 410 

Jackson,  Prof.  J.  B.  S.,  M.  D.,  Boston, 401 

Jones,  Rev.  John,  Pelham, 345,  352 

Kurtz,  John,  Boston, .  190 

Lambert,  Rev.  T.  R.,  Charlestown, 271 

Lathrop,  W.  M.,  Boston, 57 

Lewis,  Mayor  George,  Roxbury, 134 

Lincoln,  Hon.  Daniel  Waldo,  Worcester, 350 

Lincoln,  Hon.  Frederic  W.,  Jr.,  Boston, Ii9 

Lincoln,  Rev.  I.  S.,  Warwick, 257 

Lovejoy,  Rev.  J.  C,  Cambridge, 326 

Macy,  Hon.  Alfred,  Nantucket, 295 

Marsh,  Henry  A.,  Amherst, 128 

McCleary,  Samuel  F.,  Boston, 231 

McMahon,  Rev.  Lawrence,  New  Bedford, 103 

Messervey,  Hon.  William  S.,  Salem, 377 

Neale,  Rev.  Rollin  II.,  D.  D.,  Boston, 284 

Nichols,  Lyman,  Boston, 47 

Norcross,  Hon.  Otis,  Boston, 128 

O'Hagan,  Rev.  J.  B.,  Boston, 125 

Page,  P.  L.,  Pittsfield, 374 

Paine,  Hon.  Henry  W.,  Boston, 180 

Park,  Hon.  John  C.,  Boston, 172 

Parker,  Charles  Henry,  Boston, 15 

Parker,  Hon.  Joel,  Cambridge,    . 41 

Patch,  Hon.  E.  B.,  Lowell, 243 

Peabody,  Rev.  A.  P.,  D.  D.,  Cambridge, 343 

Perry,  Hon.  J.  H.,  New  Bedford,         .        .        . 335 

Philbrick,  Chase,  Lawrence, 37G 

Pierce,  Edward  L.,  Milton, 251 

Putnam,  Rev.  George,  D.  D.,  Roxbury, 288 

Richardson,  Hon.  George  C.,  Boston, 142 

Robinson,  Rev.  John  P.,  Boston, 106 

Russell,  Hon.  Charles,  Princeton, 233 

Russell,  Hon.  Charles  T.,  Cambridge, 41 

Sanger,  Hon.  George  P.,  Boston, 71,  77 

Savage,  Edward  II.,  Boston, 236 

Sheahan,  Rev.  Thomas,  Taunton, 101 

Stackpole,  Oliver,  Boston, 265 

Storer,  D.  H.,  M.  D.,  Boston, 410 

Strain,  Rev.  Patrick,  Lynn, 117 

Souchard,  Jules  E.,  Boston, 414 

Taylor,  Rev.  Edward  T.,  Boston, 121 

Tirrell,  Minot,  Jr.,  Lynn, 380 

Todd,  Rev..  John,  D.  D.,  Pittsfield, 495 


APPENDIX.  897 

Page. 

Todd,  Rev.  John  E.,  Boston, 168 

Tracy,  Rev.  Joseph,  D.  D.,  Beverly, 292 

Upton,  Hon.  George  B.,  Boston, 39 

Voelckers,  Theodore, 218 

Warren,  Hon.  G.  Washington,  Charlestown, 184 

Washburn,  Ex-Gov.  Emory,  Cambridge, 2 

Wells,  Rev.  E.  M.  P.,  Boston 89 

White,  Prof.  James  C.,  M.  D.,  Boston,        .        .        . 395 

Wightman,  H.  W.  B.,  N.  Chelmsford, 324 

Wightman,  Hon.  Joseph  M.,  Boston, 157 

Worcester,  Rev.  Thomas,  D.  D.,  Boston, 285 


FOR    REMONSTRANTS. 

Alden,  Ebenezer,  M.  D.,  Randolph, 768 

Allen,  Nathan,  M.  D.,  Lowell, 779 

Ames,  Hon.  Oliver,  North  Easton, 460 

Baker,  Hon.  John  I.,  Beverly, 691,  891 

Bartlett,  Josiah,  M.  D.,  Concord, 778 

Bellows,  A.  J.,  M.  D.,  Boston, 781,823 

Boynton,  Hon.  Nehemiah,  Chelsea, 478 

Bursley,  David,  Barnstable, 849 

Carey,  Henry  G.,  Maiden, 805 

Carleton,  Rev.  George  J.,  Charlestown, 809 

Clapp,  Hon.  Otis,  Boston, 835 

Clark,  0.  R.,  Winchester, .659 

Cleveland,  Rev.  Charles,  Boston, 481 

Cobleigh,  Rev.  N.  E.,  D.  D.,  Boston, 431 

Cochran,  Rev.  J.  G.,  Buffalo, 680 

Currier,  Hon.  William  E.,  Newburyport, 825 

Gushing,  Andrew,  Boston, 1 613 

Crosby,  Hon.  Nathan,  Lowell, *  550 

Davis,  Hon.  Woodbury,  Portland,  Me., .        .726 

Day,  Albert,  M.  D.,  Boston, 748 

Dennison,  T.  R.,  New  Bedford, 445 

Dewey,  Hon.  Charles  A.,  Milford, 668 

Ellis,  Francis  D.,  Boston, 466 

Evans,  Hon.  Benjamin,  Salisbury, 833 

Fairbanks,  Mayor  George  0.,  Fall  River, 587 

Farnsworth,  Ezra,  Boston, 426 

Fox,  Hon.  William  H.,  Taunton, 644 

Frost,  Mayor  Rufus  S.,  Chelsea, 603 

Fulton,  Rev.  J.  D.,  Boston, 508 

Gale,  Rev.  Nahum,  D.  D.,  Lee, 545 

Gannett,  Rev.  Ezra,  D.  D.,  Boston, 817 

Hanks,  Rev.  Stedman  W.,  Lowell, .    528 

Haven,  Rev.  Gilbert,  Boston, 804 

Hayes,  Dr.  Augustus  A.,  Boston, 701,  713 

Hodges,  Hon.  Samuel  W.,  Boston, 625,  629 

Hopkins,  Rev.  Mark,  D.  D.,  Williamstown, 756 

Jackson,  William  E.,  Boston, 600 

Jarvis,  Edward,  M.  D.,  Dorchester, 866 

Ladd,  Hon.  John  S.,  Cambridge, 607 

Lewis,  G.  F.>  Cleveland,  Ohio,     .  767 


898  APPENDIX. 

Page 

Manning,  Eev.  Jacob  M.,  Boston, 518,  812 

Marston,  Hon.  George,  Barnstable, GG3 

Marvin,  Eev.  E.  B.,  D.  D.,  Boston,      .        . 578 

Mellen,  Hon.  Edward,  Wayland, 850,  858 

Mitchell,  E.  L.,  Boston, 80G 

Olmstead,  Rev.  John  TV.,  D.  D.,  Roxbury, 829 

Otheman,  Rev.  Edward,  Chelsea, 865 

Palmer,  Julius  A.,  Boston, 788 

Peabody,  Ex-Mayor  Andrew  J.,  Lowell, 541 

Perham,  David,  Chelmsford, 853 

Pitman,  Hon.  Robert  C.,  New  Bedford, 447 

Plumb,  Rev.  A.  IL,  Chelsea, 664,  674 

Pollard,  Rev.  Andrew,  D.  D.,  Taunton,        .        • 645 

Raymond,  Ex-Mayor  Z.  L.,  Cambridge, 594 

Richards,  Calvin  A.,  Boston, 633 

Sabin,  Henry  L.,  M.  D.,  Williamstown, 761 

Seelyc,  Rev.  Samuel  T.,  D.  D.,  Easthampton, 737 

Spaulding,  Rev.  Willard,  Salem, 827 

Storer,  Horatio  R.,  M.  D.,  Boston,        .        .        . 797 

Stoddard,  Charles,  Boston, 418 

Taft,  Hon.  Valorous,  Upton, 814 

Thurston,  Rev.  Eli,  D.  D.,  Fall  River, 587 

Trask,  Hon.  Elipbalet,  Springfield, 462 

Trask,  Rev.  George,  Fitchburg, 620 

Tyler,  Rev.  William  S.,  Amherst,        .        .        .        . 707 

Upham,  James  H.,  Dorchester,    .                                  ,        .  678 

Usher,  Mayor  Roland  G.,  Lynn,  ...                 666 

Walker,  Hon.  Amasa,  North  BrookfieW, 483 

Walton,  Hon.  George  A.,  Lawrence. '  .  684 

Warren,  Rev.  William  F.,  D.  D.,  Wilbraham, 807 

White,  Hon.  Joseph,  Boston, 568 

Willet,  Rev.  J.  TV.,  Taunton, 652 

Williams,  Hon.  Hartley,  Worcester, 863 

Wilson,  Rev.  George  P.,  Lawrence, 688 

Wood,  Rev.  Horatio,  Lowell, 538 


IN  BEHALF  OF  THE  COLLEGE  OF  PHARMACY. 

Bixby,  Charles  C.,  North  Bridgewater, 880 

Buckingham,  Charles  E.,  M.  D.,  Boston, 869 

Campbell,  Isaac  T.,  Boston, 888 

Hollis,  Thomas,  Boston, 889 

Hunt,  James  L.,  Hingham, 875,  883 

Lincoln,  Henry  AV.,  Boston, 871 

Rand,  William  T.,  Boston, 879 

Reed,  Sampson,  Boston, 885 

Simmons,  Frank  TV.,  Boston, 886 


35832 


. 


